On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 2:59 PM, Rob Landley wrote:
> It was one of those tools like arj and binkleyterm that and zmodem that
> were just there, free downloads that didn't do enough shareware begathon
> popups to make them unusable. (There were buckets of these, zip comes
> from pkzip, which was c
On 01/28/2015 06:46 AM, Daniel Cegiełka wrote:
> 2015-01-28 4:51 GMT+01:00 Rob Landley :
>>
>> (Did I mention computer history is a hobby of mine?)
>>
>>> Rich
>>
>> Rob
>>
>
> Rob, you're famous :)
>
> https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8958591
It's actually very nice of them to track down
On 01/28/2015 06:46 AM, Daniel Cegiełka wrote:
> 2015-01-28 4:51 GMT+01:00 Rob Landley :
>>
>> (Did I mention computer history is a hobby of mine?)
>>
>>> Rich
>>
>> Rob
>>
>
> Rob, you're famous :)
>
> https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8958591
Why do these things always go viral when it's of
2015-01-28 4:51 GMT+01:00 Rob Landley :
>
> (Did I mention computer history is a hobby of mine?)
>
>> Rich
>
> Rob
>
Rob, you're famous :)
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8958591
Daniel
___
Toybox mailing list
Toybox@lists.landley.net
http://lists
On 01/27/2015 07:21 PM, stephen Turner wrote:
>
>> The BSD syscall ABIs I've seen aren't very usable (no way to make a
>> syscall without a stack, which is mandatory, and likewise no futex),
>> but fortunately you have Linux syscall ABI available on some BSDs.
>>
>> Rich
>
> So I read that unix
On 01/27/2015 07:50 PM, Rich Felker wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 08:21:04PM -0500, stephen Turner wrote:
>>> The BSD syscall ABIs I've seen aren't very usable (no way to make a
>>> syscall without a stack, which is mandatory, and likewise no futex),
>>> but fortunately you have Linux syscall
>
> I suspect this follows the BSD/SYSV split, but I may be mistaken.
> AFAIK Linux copied the SYSV-style syscall ABIs (and other psABI
> aspects) for the existing proprietary unices on the platforms it
> supported (originally, just the SCO ABI on x86).
>
> Rich
I love picking your brain just to s
On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 08:21:04PM -0500, stephen Turner wrote:
> > The BSD syscall ABIs I've seen aren't very usable (no way to make a
> > syscall without a stack, which is mandatory, and likewise no futex),
> > but fortunately you have Linux syscall ABI available on some BSDs.
>
> So I read that
> The BSD syscall ABIs I've seen aren't very usable (no way to make a
> syscall without a stack, which is mandatory, and likewise no futex),
> but fortunately you have Linux syscall ABI available on some BSDs.
>
> Rich
So I read that unix dates back to the 60's... who is more accurate to the
unix
On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 01:52:37PM -0500, stephen Turner wrote:
> >
> > They've (FreeBSD) already made their choice (llvm/c++). Therefore, I
> > believe that elftoolchain may be orphaned. The project is not too
> > actively developed, but it is small, written in C and it fits
> > perfectly with the
On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 02:29:52PM -0500, stephen Turner wrote:
> >
> >
> > musl is written for Linux and as long as it doesn't support the *BSD
> > syscall/ABI makes no sense speculate on such things like BSD make.
> >
> >
> can both be supported from the same source package or would musl have to
>
>
> musl is written for Linux and as long as it doesn't support the *BSD
> syscall/ABI makes no sense speculate on such things like BSD make.
>
>
can both be supported from the same source package or would musl have to
fork?
___
Toybox mailing list
Toyb
>
> No, because I'm not aware of any way to do the type of generic rules
> we use that would be portable to BSD make. Having to add contents to
> the makefile for every new source file is unacceptable redundancy (and
> part of the reason hideous things like automake were invented).
>
>
I dont know
2015-01-27 20:08 GMT+01:00 Rich Felker :
> On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 01:52:37PM -0500, stephen Turner wrote:
>> >
>> does musl support bsd makes?
>
> No, because I'm not aware of any way to do the type of generic rules
> we use that would be portable to BSD make.
musl is written for Linux and as lo
>
> They've (FreeBSD) already made their choice (llvm/c++). Therefore, I
> believe that elftoolchain may be orphaned. The project is not too
> actively developed, but it is small, written in C and it fits
> perfectly with the pcc, tcc, libfirm/cparser etc... and musl. I think
> it could be a very u
2015-01-27 19:11 GMT+01:00 Rob Landley :
> On 01/27/2015 01:16 AM, Daniel Cegiełka wrote:
>> 2015-01-27 7:20 GMT+01:00 Rob Landley :
>>> On 01/26/15 12:56, stephen Turner wrote:
>> What is important is how this code (without BSD Makefile) may be
>> useful for us. FreeBSD has an alternative binutils
On 01/27/2015 01:16 AM, Daniel Cegiełka wrote:
> 2015-01-27 7:20 GMT+01:00 Rob Landley :
>> On 01/26/15 12:56, stephen Turner wrote:
> What is important is how this code (without BSD Makefile) may be
> useful for us. FreeBSD has an alternative binutils tools from LLVM
> (lld, llvm-as, llvm-ar, llvm
2015-01-27 8:27 GMT+01:00 stephen Turner :
> I wonder how much of a pain it would be to set it up for gnu make?
no pain - just to 15-30 minutes of work. Support for GNU make can be
added without touching the (BSD) Makefile (gnu make first execute
GNUMakefile):
http://www.gnu.org/software/make/ma
>
>
> bsd make is not a problem. They are equally dismayed to see GNU make,
> so more understanding :)
>
> What is important is how this code (without BSD Makefile) may be
> useful for us. FreeBSD has an alternative binutils tools from LLVM
> (lld, llvm-as, llvm-ar, llvm-nm, llvm-ranlib, llvm-strin
2015-01-27 7:20 GMT+01:00 Rob Landley :
> On 01/26/15 12:56, stephen Turner wrote:
>> yea, if it works well as a drop in replacement for binutils then i think
>> it will be a perfect fit with my musl-toybox-pcc-flex-byacc-bsd_m4 setup
>> i have going.
>
> If I can get pcc, musl, and this to build t
and according to the install file you need a bsd based make such as pmake.
it apparently has been sucessfully built under ubuntu using pmake
On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 1:47 AM, stephen Turner
wrote:
>
>>> Last release in 2012. Bit concerning...
>>>
>>>
>> wow, i didnt even notice! I did see two dif
>
>
>> Last release in 2012. Bit concerning...
>>
>>
> wow, i didnt even notice! I did see two different make files i believe,
> one labeled gnumakefile?
>
>
according to the ticketing system there have been fixes applied.
https://sourceforge.net/p/elftoolchain/tickets/search/?q=status%3Aclosed
a
>
> If I can get pcc, musl, and this to build toybox, I'll be _thrilled_.
>
> Unfortunately, my first attempt to get "elftoolchain" to compile got an
> error message about wanting bsd make. This makes me suspect that
> building a linux kernel with this is deeply unlikely in the short run...
>
> Las
On 01/26/15 12:56, stephen Turner wrote:
> yea, if it works well as a drop in replacement for binutils then i think
> it will be a perfect fit with my musl-toybox-pcc-flex-byacc-bsd_m4 setup
> i have going.
If I can get pcc, musl, and this to build toybox, I'll be _thrilled_.
Unfortunately, my fi
Sounds to me like Rich has the bug and will inevitably join the
elftoolchain project :)
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 3:02 PM, Daniel Cegiełka
wrote:
> 2015-01-26 20:38 GMT+01:00 Rich Felker :
> > On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 08:31:08PM +0100, Daniel Cegiełka wrote:
> >> 2015-01-26 20:23 GMT+01:00 Rich Fel
2015-01-26 20:38 GMT+01:00 Rich Felker :
> On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 08:31:08PM +0100, Daniel Cegiełka wrote:
>> 2015-01-26 20:23 GMT+01:00 Rich Felker :
> In particular, one thing I wonder about is whether it requires O(n)
> temporary working space in the number of input symbols. This seems to
> be
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 08:31:08PM +0100, Daniel Cegiełka wrote:
> 2015-01-26 20:23 GMT+01:00 Rich Felker :
> > On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 06:34:27PM +0100, Daniel Cegiełka wrote:
> >> 2015-01-26 18:13 GMT+01:00 stephen Turner :
> >> > thanks for the response man! I found this and pointed it out in an
2015-01-26 20:23 GMT+01:00 Rich Felker :
> On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 06:34:27PM +0100, Daniel Cegiełka wrote:
>> 2015-01-26 18:13 GMT+01:00 stephen Turner :
>> > thanks for the response man! I found this and pointed it out in another
>> > email chain actually! I haven't had a chance to test it and s
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 06:34:27PM +0100, Daniel Cegiełka wrote:
> 2015-01-26 18:13 GMT+01:00 stephen Turner :
> > thanks for the response man! I found this and pointed it out in another
> > email chain actually! I haven't had a chance to test it and see how it
> > compares to binutils but i defin
2015-01-26 19:56 GMT+01:00 stephen Turner :
> yea, if it works well as a drop in replacement for binutils
it works, but you will need to add custom sys/cdef.h with musl.
btw. ld is not ready.
___
Toybox mailing list
Toybox@lists.landley.net
http://lists.
yea, if it works well as a drop in replacement for binutils then i think it
will be a perfect fit with my musl-toybox-pcc-flex-byacc-bsd_m4 setup i
have going.
I'm just getting started with my setup. I have set up the description,
wiki, email lists(2), several mile stones etc. for what will be my
2015-01-26 18:13 GMT+01:00 stephen Turner :
> thanks for the response man! I found this and pointed it out in another
> email chain actually! I haven't had a chance to test it and see how it
> compares to binutils but i definitely plan to very soon and will report back
> how it works. unfortunatel
thanks for the response man! I found this and pointed it out in another
email chain actually! I haven't had a chance to test it and see how it
compares to binutils but i definitely plan to very soon and will report
back how it works. unfortunately i dont have a setup like rob yet for
testing again
http://sourceforge.net/p/elftoolchain/code/HEAD/tree/trunk/
Maybe it will be helpful.
Daniel
___
Toybox mailing list
Toybox@lists.landley.net
http://lists.landley.net/listinfo.cgi/toybox-landley.net
On 12/18/2014 02:03 PM, stephen Turner wrote:
> If somebody, somewhere, can build a linux kernel with pcc (even a mostly
> allnoconfig one with extensive patching applied, ala the old tccboot
> iso), I'll take a second look at it.
>
> Last I checked it was down to one part-time dev
>
>
>
> If somebody, somewhere, can build a linux kernel with pcc (even a mostly
> allnoconfig one with extensive patching applied, ala the old tccboot
> iso), I'll take a second look at it.
>
> Last I checked it was down to one part-time developer who only cared
> about bsd and not linux, but I'm
On 12/11/14 14:04, Isaac Dunham wrote:
> By the time we have a full-featured depmod, nm would be not much more
> work.
> A full POSIX ar (adequate for libraries) would also cover ranlib.
> strings is already done.
> size and strip are the main binutils tools in addition to those...
It's possible t
On 12/11/14 12:58, stephen Turner wrote:
> Rob and list,
>
> I see there are plans to add "ar" to toybox.
Pretty much just because busybox had one. Otherwise I'd have thrown it
in the qcc todo list nstead.
(The "make" command is another corner case. It could go in toybox, it
could go in qcc. I
On Thu, Dec 11, 2014 at 01:58:01PM -0500, stephen Turner wrote:
> Rob and list,
>
> I see there are plans to add "ar" to toybox. this would be compatible with
> binutils correct? I think musl-libc has a built in linker compatible with
That would be feasible, at least for someone who understands EL
On 11/12/2014, stephen Turner wrote:
> I think musl-libc has a built in linker compatible with
> "ld" in binutils by creating a symlink to libc.so
No, this ≠ ld, rather it loads the libraries what dynamic-linked
program files need but can't create the program files.
__
Rob and list,
I see there are plans to add "ar" to toybox. this would be compatible with
binutils correct? I think musl-libc has a built in linker compatible with
"ld" in binutils by creating a symlink to libc.so so then we would only
need "as" to have a fully functioning compile suite correct? I
41 matches
Mail list logo
