From: Rob Landley
Replace kernel/timeconst.pl with kernel/timeconst.sh. The new shell script
is much simpler, about 1/4 the size, and runs on Red Hat 9 from 2003.
Peter Anvin added this perl to 2.6.25. Before that, the kernel had never
required perl to build.
Signed-off-by: Rob Landley
---
Hi Rob.
On Fri, Jan 02, 2009 at 02:13:30AM -0600, Rob Landley wrote:
> From: Rob Landley
>
> Replace kernel/timeconst.pl with kernel/timeconst.sh. The new shell script
> is much simpler, about 1/4 the size, and runs on Red Hat 9 from 2003.
This part of the changelog is OK except that is fails
On Friday 02 January 2009 03:04:39 Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> Hi Rob.
>
> On Fri, Jan 02, 2009 at 02:13:30AM -0600, Rob Landley wrote:
> > From: Rob Landley
> >
> > Replace kernel/timeconst.pl with kernel/timeconst.sh. The new shell
> > script is much simpler, about 1/4 the size, and runs on Red Hat 9
Rob Landley wrote:
>
> You mean "The new shell script is much simpler, about 1/4 the size, runs on
> Red Hat 9 from 2003, and isn't perl?" :)
>
And introduces unclear environment dependencies depending on how
external utilities are implemented.
The whole point of why that script was written in
On Fri, 2009-01-02 at 06:00 -0600, Rob Landley wrote:
> On Friday 02 January 2009 03:04:39 Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> > > +# Output start of header file
> > > +
> > > +cat << EOF
> > > +/* Automatically generated by kernel/timeconst.sh */
> > > +/* Conversion constants for HZ == $HZ */
> > > +
> > > +#i
Hi Robert,
I fully support your argument here: Requiring lots of hacks in various languages
to build a system core sucks. But now sth. more productive:
On Friday 02 January 2009, Rob Landley wrote:
> diff -r d0c7611dcfd6 kernel/Makefile
> --- a/kernel/Makefile Tue Dec 30 17:48:25 2008 -0800
> +++
From: Rob Landley
Replace kernel/timeconst.pl with kernel/timeconst.sh. The new shell script
is much simpler, about 1/4 the size, and runs on Red Hat 9 from 2003.
It requires a shell which can do 64 bit math, such as bash, busybox ash,
or dash running on a 64 bit host.
Changes from previous ve
On Friday 02 January 2009 13:33:02 H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Rob Landley wrote:
> > You mean "The new shell script is much simpler, about 1/4 the size, runs
> > on Red Hat 9 from 2003, and isn't perl?" :)
>
> And introduces unclear environment dependencies depending on how
> external utilities are im
Rob Landley wrote:
>
> I consider this a step up from code with an implicit dependency on a CPAN
> library.
>
There is no CPAN library in use. Math::BigInt is a standard part of
Perl, and the canned values is there only to support extremely old
versions of Perl, or weird system configurations,
On Saturday 03 January 2009 06:28:22 Ingo Oeser wrote:
> > +for i in "MSEC 1000" "USEC 100"
> > +do
> > + NAME=$(echo $i | awk '{print $1}')
>
> cut -d' ' -f1 does the same
>
> > + PERIOD=$(echo $i | awk '{print $2}')
>
> cut -d' ' -f2 does the same
>From a standards perspective
http://
On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 19:36:04 CST, Rob Landley said:
> On Saturday 03 January 2009 06:28:22 Ingo Oeser wrote:
> > > +for i in "MSEC 1000" "USEC 100"
> > > +do
> > > + NAME=$(echo $i | awk '{print $1}')
> >
> > cut -d' ' -f1 does the same
> >
> > > + PERIOD=$(echo $i | awk '{print $2}')
> >
> >
On Saturday 03 January 2009 23:07:55 valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
> On Sat, 03 Jan 2009 19:36:04 CST, Rob Landley said:
> > On Saturday 03 January 2009 06:28:22 Ingo Oeser wrote:
> > > > +for i in "MSEC 1000" "USEC 100"
> > > > +do
> > > > + NAME=$(echo $i | awk '{print $1}')
> > >
> >
On Sat, Jan 03, 2009 at 07:36:04PM -0600, Rob Landley wrote:
> On Saturday 03 January 2009 06:28:22 Ingo Oeser wrote:
> > > +for i in "MSEC 1000" "USEC 100"
> > > +do
> > > + NAME=$(echo $i | awk '{print $1}')
> >
> > cut -d' ' -f1 does the same
> >
> > > + PERIOD=$(echo $i | awk '{print $2}')
> I note that sed and printf and such are all susv3. I have an explicit test
> for 32 bit math in the script that cares, and this worked in Red Hat 9 circa
> 2003.
If you are trying to do arbitary precision maths using standard posix
tools just use dc. That way the standard is explicit about wh
Alan Cox wrote:
>> I note that sed and printf and such are all susv3. I have an explicit test
>> for 32 bit math in the script that cares, and this worked in Red Hat 9 circa
>> 2003.
>
> If you are trying to do arbitary precision maths using standard posix
> tools just use dc. That way the stan
On Sunday 04 January 2009 06:07:35 Alan Cox wrote:
> > I note that sed and printf and such are all susv3. I have an explicit
> > test for 32 bit math in the script that cares, and this worked in Red Hat
> > 9 circa 2003.
>
> If you are trying to do arbitary precision maths using standard posix
> t
Rob Landley wrote:
>
> C) The only calculation which can overflow 64 bits (the ADJ32 one) turns out
> not to need arbitrary precision math, just 72 bits, and if it ever uses more
> than 32 then bottom 32 are all zero before the divide so you can do it in
> three lines.
>
... for the current c
valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
> Close, but no cee-gar. cut does something counter-intuitive with multiple
> blanks:
>
> % echo 'ab' | awk '{print $2}'
> b
> % echo 'ab' | cut -d' ' -f2
>
> % echo 'ab' | sed -r 's/[ ]+/ /g' | cut -d' ' -f2
> b
>
> Unfortunately, 'sed -r' isn't in the op
Rob Landley wrote:
> In a private email, Bernd Petrovitsch suggested "set -- $i" and then
> using NAME=$1; PERIOD=$2. (I keep getting private email responses
> to these sort of threads, and then getting dismissed as the only one
> who cares about the issue. Less so this time around, but still...)
On Son, 2009-01-04 at 22:13 +, Jamie Lokier wrote:
> Rob Landley wrote:
> > In a private email, Bernd Petrovitsch suggested "set -- $i" and then
> > using NAME=$1; PERIOD=$2. (I keep getting private email responses
> > to these sort of threads, and then getting dismissed as the only one
> > wh
On Fri, Jan 2, 2009 at 12:13 AM, Rob Landley wrote:
> Replace kernel/timeconst.pl with kernel/timeconst.sh. The new shell script
> is much simpler, about 1/4 the size, and runs on Red Hat 9 from 2003.
>
> Peter Anvin added this perl to 2.6.25. Before that, the kernel had never
> required perl to
On Sunday 04 January 2009 14:39:36 H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Rob Landley wrote:
> > C) The only calculation which can overflow 64 bits (the ADJ32 one) turns
> > out not to need arbitrary precision math, just 72 bits, and if it ever
> > uses more than 32 then bottom 32 are all zero before the divide s
Bernd Petrovitsch wrote:
> > (I have 850 Linux boxes on my network with a bourne shell which
> > doesn't do $((...)). I won't be building kernels on them though :-)
>
> Believe it or not, but there are folks out there who build the firmware
> on ARM 200 MHz NFS-mounted systems natively (and not
On Sunday 04 January 2009 18:15:30 Bernd Petrovitsch wrote:
> On Son, 2009-01-04 at 22:13 +, Jamie Lokier wrote:
> > Rob Landley wrote:
> > > In a private email, Bernd Petrovitsch suggested "set -- $i" and then
> > > using NAME=$1; PERIOD=$2. (I keep getting private email responses
> > > to th
On Sunday 04 January 2009 18:41:15 Ray Lee wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 2, 2009 at 12:13 AM, Rob Landley wrote:
> > Replace kernel/timeconst.pl with kernel/timeconst.sh. The new shell
> > script is much simpler, about 1/4 the size, and runs on Red Hat 9 from
> > 2003.
> >
> > Peter Anvin added this perl
Bernd Petrovitsch wrote:
> I assume that the NFS-mounted root filesystem is a real distribution.
Not unless you call uClinux (MMU-less) a real distribution, no.
> > (* - No MMU on some ARMs, but I'm working on ARM FDPIC-ELF to add
> > proper shared libs. Feel free to fund this :-)
>
> The
On Son, 2009-01-04 at 22:50 -0600, Rob Landley wrote:
> On Sunday 04 January 2009 18:15:30 Bernd Petrovitsch wrote:
[...]
> > ACK. A bash can IMHO be expected. Even going for `dash` is IMHO somewhat
> > too extreme.
>
> I have yet to encounter a system that uses dash _without_ bash. (All ubuntu
On Mon, 2009-01-05 at 02:23 +, Jamie Lokier wrote:
> Bernd Petrovitsch wrote:
> > > (I have 850 Linux boxes on my network with a bourne shell which
> > > doesn't do $((...)). I won't be building kernels on them though :-)
> >
> > Believe it or not, but there are folks out there who build the
On Mon, 2009-01-05 at 15:01 +, Jamie Lokier wrote:
> Bernd Petrovitsch wrote:
> > I assume that the NFS-mounted root filesystem is a real distribution.
>
> Not unless you call uClinux (MMU-less) a real distribution, no.
Not really.
> > > (* - No MMU on some ARMs, but I'm working on ARM FDPIC
On Monday 05 January 2009 04:46:18 Bernd Petrovitsch wrote:
> > My 850 Linux boxes are 166MHz ARMs and occasionally NFS-mounted.
> > Their /bin/sh does not do $((...)), and Bash is not there at all.
>
> I assume that the NFS-mounted root filesystem is a real distribution.
> And on the local flash i
On Monday 05 January 2009 09:01:56 Jamie Lokier wrote:
> Bernd Petrovitsch wrote:
> > I assume that the NFS-mounted root filesystem is a real distribution.
>
> Not unless you call uClinux (MMU-less) a real distribution, no.
I want things to be orthogonal. The following should be completely separa
Rob Landley wrote:
From: Rob Landley
Replace kernel/timeconst.pl with kernel/timeconst.sh. The new shell script
is much simpler, about 1/4 the size, and runs on Red Hat 9 from 2003.
It requires a shell which can do 64 bit math, such as bash, busybox ash,
or dash running on a 64 bit host.
I
On Saturday 03 January 2009 20:48:21 David Vrabel wrote:
> Rob Landley wrote:
> > From: Rob Landley
> >
> > Replace kernel/timeconst.pl with kernel/timeconst.sh. The new shell
> > script is much simpler, about 1/4 the size, and runs on Red Hat 9 from
> > 2003.
> >
> > It requires a shell which ca
33 matches
Mail list logo
