On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 07:56:03AM +0200, Carmelo AMOROSO wrote:
> Carmelo AMOROSO wrote:
> >Hi Paul, All
> >attached a little fix in clone asm code for SH to use a delayed branch
> >instead of a normal branch.
> >Let me know so I can commit it.
> >
> >Regards,
> >Carmelo
> >
> >
> Please hold on.
On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 07:58:15AM +0200, Carmelo AMOROSO wrote:
> Paul Mundt wrote:
> >On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 03:53:18PM +0200, Carmelo AMOROSO wrote:
> >>Takashi Yoshii wrote:
> >>>For SH, init/fini function prologue is defined in
> >>>libc/sysdeps/linux/sh/crti.S
> >>>as follows.
> >>>
> >>>|
Paul Mundt wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 03:53:18PM +0200, Carmelo AMOROSO wrote:
>> Takashi Yoshii wrote:
>>> For SH, init/fini function prologue is defined in
>>> libc/sysdeps/linux/sh/crti.S
>>> as follows.
>>>
>>> | (frame entry)
>>> |#ifndef __HAVE_SHARED__
>>> | (GOT pointer initializatio
Carmelo AMOROSO wrote:
> Hi Paul, All
> attached a little fix in clone asm code for SH to use a delayed branch
> instead of a normal branch.
> Let me know so I can commit it.
>
> Regards,
> Carmelo
>
>
Please hold on. After a discussion with a colleague of mine, really sh4
architectural expert
On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 03:53:18PM +0200, Carmelo AMOROSO wrote:
> Takashi Yoshii wrote:
> >For SH, init/fini function prologue is defined in
> >libc/sysdeps/linux/sh/crti.S
> >as follows.
> >
> >| (frame entry)
> >|#ifndef __HAVE_SHARED__
> >| (GOT pointer initialization)
> >|#endif
> >
> >I thin
On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 09:40:43PM +0300, Cristi Magherusan wrote:
>fenv.h was missing from 0.9.29 but got committed to current in r20880
>and it has nothing to do with gcc-4.3.
well libdecnumber can be configured to use fenv(3) and libdecnumber is
in gcc, so it is in fact related (a little bit, i
A bit offtopic:
UCLIBC_HAS_REALTIME's help is too "consistent", since we don't have
everything that it's listed there. aio_* for example is missing, but I
have it working on my branch.
IMHO, we should either include support for everything or clean the help
message.
Best regards,
Cristi
--
Ing
On Wed, 2008-08-27 at 18:53 +0200, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 11:17:39AM -0500, Kevin Day wrote:
> >gcc-4.3.1 seems to need fenv.h, or more specifically information from
> >within bits/fenv.h.
> >
> >Because bits/fenv.h should not be directly included a stub fenv.h
>
Ricard, Bernhard,
All,
On Wednesday 27 August 2008 16:29:57 Ricard Wanderlof wrote:
> Here's a patch to move ifaddrs.h from libc/inet/ to include/ . It is also
> removed from the installed include files if UCLIBC_SUPPORT_AI_ADDRCONFIG
> is not enabled. It's largely the same as what Bernhard and Ya
On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 11:17:39AM -0500, Kevin Day wrote:
>gcc-4.3.1 seems to need fenv.h, or more specifically information from
>within bits/fenv.h.
>
>Because bits/fenv.h should not be directly included a stub fenv.h
>needs to be created so that '#include ' works.
>Currently, no fenv.h exists as
gcc-4.3.1 seems to need fenv.h, or more specifically information from
within bits/fenv.h.
Because bits/fenv.h should not be directly included a stub fenv.h
needs to be created so that '#include ' works.
Currently, no fenv.h exists as far as I can find.
(Looking under uClibc-0.8.28.3 and uClibc-0.8
On Wed, 27 Aug 2008, Will Newton wrote:
>> Any idea what is wrong with the !old version, in that it seems not to be
>> recommended for use?
>
> No, I'm not sure. There were a few small issues with Makefiles but I
> think these are all fixed now. Certainly we are shipping it in a product
> that
On Wed, 27 Aug 2008, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
>> Patch made against svn 23243, and included inline as well as an
>> attachment. If there are no comments, I'll go ahead and commit this in a
>> couple of days.
>
> Ok if you change the comment to fit in one line, like
># Remove ifaddr
On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 04:29:57PM +0200, Ricard Wanderlof wrote:
>
> Yeah, should have split this into one 'follow-up-the-thread' and one
> actual patch. So, resending the patch with correct subject. Sorry for the
> confusion.
>
> Here's a patch to move ifaddrs.h from libc/inet/ to include/ . I
Yeah, should have split this into one 'follow-up-the-thread' and one
actual patch. So, resending the patch with correct subject. Sorry for the
confusion.
Here's a patch to move ifaddrs.h from libc/inet/ to include/ . It is also
removed from the installed include files if UCLIBC_SUPPORT_AI_ADD
I'm bringing up this thread again, as a similar situation as Yann's (short
resumé: autoconf [or similar tool] finds getaddrinfo in the libc, and
assumes the associated header file ifaddrs.h is present, but in uClibc,
this is an internal header file, so the subsequent build fails) has
cropped
On Sun, Jun 08, 2008 at 01:38:54PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Author: bernds
>Date: 2008-06-08 13:38:53 -0700 (Sun, 08 Jun 2008)
>New Revision: 22271
>
>Log:
>In string.h, move libc_hidden_proto next to the corresponding declaration.
>Filter them out when installing headers.
>
>Tested by buil
On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 11:46 AM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 12:39:44PM +0200, Ricard Wanderlof wrote:
>
>>> Yes, I use it and it works.
>>
>>Any idea what is wrong with the !old version, in that it seems not to be
>>recommended for use?
>
> IIRC t
On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 12:39:44PM +0200, Ricard Wanderlof wrote:
>> Yes, I use it and it works.
>
>Any idea what is wrong with the !old version, in that it seems not to be
>recommended for use?
IIRC the old is the fallback if you encounter problems in the !old.
Since the !old is, by now, suppos
On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 11:39 AM, Ricard Wanderlof
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 27 Aug 2008, Will Newton wrote:
>
> LINUXTHREADS_OLD:
>
> Ok, what does this currently mean? This selects the old libpthreads
> implementation from the dawn of time, but what's the alternati
On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 11:32:30AM +0200, Natanael Copa wrote:
>Hi,
>
>Were there any plans for a 0.9.30 release before the NPTL merge?
>
>What is the status of the 0.9.30 release?
vapier would know, ISTR that he was the designated RM.
What are the outstanding regressions versus 0.9.29 on your ar
On Wed, 27 Aug 2008, Will Newton wrote:
LINUXTHREADS_OLD:
Ok, what does this currently mean? This selects the old libpthreads
implementation from the dawn of time, but what's the alternative? The
new NPTL stuff hasn't been merged yet, so this intermediate version is..
On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 12:58:50PM +0300, Cristi Magherusan wrote:
>> Said that, I don't think addign TLS support for i386 is difficult, but
>> we need someone having time to spend on it.
>
>Do you mean adding TLS support for the old linuxthreads branch on x86?
Perhaps it would be better to upda
Hello,
On Tue, 2008-08-19 at 13:14 +0200, Carmelo AMOROSO wrote:
> Cristi Magherusan wrote:
> > On Tue, 2008-08-19 at 08:34 +0200, Carmelo Amoroso wrote:
> >> Cristi Magherusan wrote:
> >>> Hello,
> >>>
> >>> Can anyone tell which revision of the NPTL branch is tested and
> >>> confirmed to work
On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 12:29 AM, Rob Landley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tuesday 26 August 2008 08:03:03 you wrote:
>> On Sun, Aug 24, 2008 at 06:56:44PM -0500, Rob Landley wrote:
>> >Fiddling with menuconfig:
>> >
>> >DOPIC (Create only position independent code)
>> >
>> > Does not say why y
Hi,
Were there any plans for a 0.9.30 release before the NPTL merge?
What is the status of the 0.9.30 release?
Thanks!
-nc
___
uClibc mailing list
uClibc@uclibc.org
http://busybox.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/uclibc
26 matches
Mail list logo
