On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 2:37 AM, Kyle Sallee kyle.sal...@gmail.com wrote:
I probably should have replied to the list.
-- Forwarded message --
From: Kyle Sallee kyle.sal...@gmail.com
Date: Sat, May 9, 2009 at 5:36 PM
Subject: Re: Please backport a patch to
On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 11:08 PM, Mike Frysinger vap...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Saturday 09 May 2009 20:37:28 Kyle Sallee wrote:
please do not top post
unfortunately the default when using gmail :(
Headers from linux kernel 2.6.29.2 can be used.
At least I compiled uClibc using 2.6.29.1
On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 4:24 PM, Mike Frysinger vap...@gentoo.org wrote:
I faced the same issue with uclibc-0.9.30* and linux-2.6.23. I thought
the fix was in the kernel headers: I was wrong.
if the kernel headers are using __user, they're broken. fix them.
got it
It's easier to patch
On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 8:35 PM, Bernd Schmidt bernds_...@t-online.de wrote:
Well, ease of use was among the reasons listed. I find this puzzling as my
experience with git has been one of incomprehensible error messages and repo
corruption at the slightest provocation. However, I don't
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 1:03 PM, rhabarber1848 rhabarber1...@web.de wrote:
Hi,
this patch fixes a compile error with Linux kernel 2.6.17:
http://sources.busybox.net/index.py/trunk/uClibc/libc/sysdeps/linux/common/bits/sigcontext.h?r1=4309r2=24954pathrev=25109
I know the kernel is ancient,
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 2:54 PM, Christian MICHON
christian.mic...@gmail.com wrote:
or modify /usr/include/asm/sigcontext.h by hand, removing the
offending __user. Most of the patch you're pointing to is actually
inside the kernel's headers (I still use 2.6.23).
sorry, wrong location/source
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 3:14 PM, rhabarber1848 rhabarber1...@web.de wrote:
I also use gcc-3.4.6. This problem happens only with Kernel 2.6.17, not with
2.6.9 nor with 2.6.26*.
I faced the same issue with uclibc-0.9.30* and linux-2.6.23. I thought
the fix was in the kernel headers: I was wrong.
On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 6:20 PM, Oliver Metz oliver.m...@fswiwi.org wrote:
When compiling uClibc++ with buildroot toolchain (gcc-4.3.3) I get the
attached error.
One year ago this error was reported too but the mentioned patch isn’t
available anymore.
On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 3:44 AM, Stefan de Konink ste...@konink.de wrote:
Hi,
I wonder if anyone using uclibc succesfully linked an application using TCC.
My binaries end up as:
ldd ./tcc
checking sub-depends for '/lib/libm.so.0'
libc.so.0 = /lib/libc.so.0 (0xb7f92000)
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 11:14 PM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
rep.dot@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
uClibc-0.9.30.1 has been released.
As usual, the release tarballs can be downloaded from
http://uClibc.org/
This is a bugfix only release ¹) and as such, everybody is encouraged
to upgrade.
Thanks
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 11:02 PM, matthieu castet
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I attach a new version where all file have copyright headers and minor
fixes.
Matthieu
PS : I wonder if the thread lib name should be android or bionic.
I would prefer bionic... Better, stronger, faster... ;-)
On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 1:52 PM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
uClibc-0.9.30 has been released.
As usual, the release tarballs can be downloaded from http://uclibc.org/ .
Numerous improvements found their way into this release (¹), everybody
is encouraged to
On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 4:33 PM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 09:03:18AM -0600, Rob Landley wrote:
On Wednesday 12 November 2008 06:52:07 Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
Hi,
uClibc-0.9.30 has been released.
Yay!
:)
Just as a sidenote and
On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 8:01 AM, Rob Landley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Friday 31 October 2008 08:07:41 Christian MICHON wrote:
Hi,
I *finally* managed to compile uclibc++ and it now complains about
powl, sqrtl, etc... missing on my system.
I'm still using uclibc-0.9.29 :(
I've been
Jivin David McCullough lays it down...
I don't recall any special magic
Some magic could be invoked to save time at least :-)
More investigations on D*B, gcc-3.4.6 and uclibc-0.9.29, trying to
compile stock uClibc++-0.2.2.
The only use of libsupc++.a is apparently to extract some objects from
On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 10:51 PM, Rob Landley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The only use of libsupc++.a is apparently to extract some objects from it
only.
Er, yes, I said:
All I really _need_ is a half-dozen .o files bundled into that .a file,
I did not realize I was that redundant :)
Hence:
On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 10:53 PM, Rob Landley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Saturday 01 November 2008 09:03:15 Christian MICHON wrote:
found some spare time. unfortunately, these source files are c++...
catch 22
Not really. My build is already _creating_ a working g++, which is why I
didn't
Hi,
I *finally* managed to compile uclibc++ and it now complains about
powl, sqrtl, etc... missing on my system.
I'm still using uclibc-0.9.29 :(
I read somewhere that a patch containing SuSv3 math functions is to be
included and it's inside bugs.uclibc.org.
I looked for one, and what I found
On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 8:49 PM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I'm a bit puzzled about ldd, i admit:
$ ldd /bin/ls
/bin/ls: is setuid
FOO etc root tmp
FOO2 home susr
bin ldd
On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 10:51 AM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
Yes, I know - we have taken our time. After quite a long period of
general improvement all over the place we are pleased to announce
uClibc-0.9.30-rc2.
The release candidate 2 can be downloaded as usual
On Sun, Oct 26, 2008 at 8:18 PM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Oct 26, 2008 at 09:38:15AM +0100, Christian MICHON wrote:
what are the compilers prerequisite for this release ?
(it seems gcc-3.4.6 is not supported anymore)
I'm usually using the current release. gcc-3
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 2:57 AM, Jeremy Bowen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
rant
Argh! Why is the world full of lemmings. buildroot is not the magical answer
to life the universe and everything.
/rant
42 is the right answer :)
More seriously, when building gcc, have you patched for avr32 the
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 12:58 AM, Jeremy Bowen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Now I'm trying to build and install uClibc (from svn) and I'm getting confused
about the various paths that I should use.
I have the following in my .config
# Library Installation Options
#
SHARED_LIB_LOADER_PREFIX=/lib
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 8:48 AM, Natanael Copa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 2008-10-20 at 14:01 +0200, Christian MICHON wrote:
On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 12:01 PM, Vladimir Dronnikov
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You can use a gentoo stage3 tarball, chroot and it just works.
Is it true
On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 12:01 PM, Vladimir Dronnikov
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You can use a gentoo stage3 tarball, chroot and it just works.
Is it true that gentoo is uClibc-based?
what is the size of a stage3 gentoo ? :)
You can do pretty much without gettext.
Pity, buildroot does need
On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 11:17 PM, Rob Landley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Monday 20 October 2008 03:39:38 Natanael Copa wrote:
On Sun, 2008-10-19 at 09:48 +, Vladimir Dronnikov wrote:
supply a cross compiler for the host system?
It's pretty trivial...
Pity that noone ships a
On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 11:48 AM, Vladimir Dronnikov
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
supply a cross compiler for the host system?
It's pretty trivial...
Pity that noone ships a tarball of x86 toolchain which could be just
untarred to the rootfs and has out-of-box means to build, say,
buildroot for
2008/10/19 Vladimir Dronnikov [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I now can not afford downloading 60Mb as I am using a dialup line:(
I'll try it tomorrow. But still can you extract only toolchain into a
separate package while leaving rootfs stuff aside?
I've an older release of DetaolB (v0.3 around 17Mb, link
On Feb 16, 2008 12:38 AM, Mike Frysinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tuesday 08 January 2008, Mike Frysinger wrote:
at this time, i'd consider gcc-3.4.6 the oldest version worth using with
uClibc. that means it's the oldest version i'd consider adding source code
tweaks to work around gcc
DetaolB v0.8 has been released 18th,January 2008
http://prdownloads.sf.net/detaolb/detaolb_v08.iso (~60Mb)
Changelog:
- added debugging capabilities (gdb, ddd)
- added fortran language support
- added many editors (qemacs, Scite, nedit, zile)
- upgrade to perl 5.10 !
- static checker for c/c++
On 9/26/07, emBuild Software Design [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd like to request as a feature addition to uclibc the addition of specific
support for libraryopt (http://libraryopt.sourceforge.net/), a tool that
reduces shared library size by removing unneeded object files from a rebuild
of the
I found back the script: it's still in the uClibc tarball.
Have a look at libstrip:
uClibc-0.9.29\extra\libstrip\
--
Christian
--
http://detaolb.sourceforge.net/, a linux distribution for Qemu with Git inside !
___
uClibc mailing list
On 9/10/07, Jonathan Delizy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks Christian.
Does anyone know how I could have this functions? Another library maybe?
as a dedicated single function ? yes, look at koders. It's usually good
to add it as keyword when googling for missing code.
On 9/4/07, Mark Shelby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
7.) Is the system developer friendly? Why, or why not? If yes, what
can be done to encourage more participation? If no, what fundemental
things need to be changed?
actually, if you minus off the routers and their (outdated) uclibc,
there are not
On 8/27/07, Bernhard Fischer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Aug 27, 2007 at 12:45:20AM +0200, Christian MICHON wrote:
On 8/26/07, Rob Landley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Saturday 25 August 2007 8:51:48 am Bernhard Fischer wrote:
On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 07:34:06PM -0500, Kevin Day wrote
On 8/26/07, Rob Landley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Saturday 25 August 2007 8:51:48 am Bernhard Fischer wrote:
On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 07:34:06PM -0500, Kevin Day wrote:
internal_function sounds like it is supposed to be internal to uClibc.
This is already fixed in svn. A patch which
Hi lists,
for those who would optionally need qemu-0.9.0 (not the CVS current,
the official release) compiled versus uclibc-0.9.29 on x86, please
find attached a patch which allows it. i've not tested other
architectures like arm/sparc.
it's basically a removal of aio (not present in uclibc) and
On 8/21/07, Rob Landley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Friday 17 August 2007 3:23:04 pm Christian MICHON wrote:
DetaolB aimed to be a much-less-than-a-floppy x86 linux live distro.
Now, it's evolving more into a-la-slax type of distro.
As did Puppy Linux before it.
Rob
I actually intend
On 7/20/07, Blue Swirl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
have you seen this ? this is in a chrooted environment.
One problem that may be related is that vfork is not implemented in
linux-user emulation.
what I can tell is that glibc statically linked busybox does work.
once you've a patch, I'll test
On 7/11/07, Blue Swirl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's entirely possibly that qemu and real sparc hardware are behaving
differently, but I'm not seeing this bus error under qemu. (I haven't got
real sparc hardware, so I can only debug against qemu...)
Right. Debugging the problem I found
On 7/11/07, Rob Landley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
When you get that kind of segmentation fault, see if hello world segfaults
too. (In general, when building with a new toolchain, new C library, new
kernel, new root filesystem packaging method, or a new system in general, if
anything goes wrong
On 7/9/07, Kevin Day [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If I am understanding you correctly, I believe I had had this happen
before, for me it was a problem with an external intl while ncurses
tried to build the menu.
Here is my solution:
sed -i -e 's|$(HOSTCC) $(HOST_EXTRACFLAGS) $(HOSTCFLAGS)
On 7/5/07, Rob Landley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What's the difference between deltaolb and Firmware Linux, anyway? I'm still
curious about this.
a few differences, quite minor actually (that's why I said in the past we
shared many common goals :-) )...
I actually started this in 2002, but
On 6/30/07, Blue Swirl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As the number of Sparc32 distributions keeps approaching zero, could
you consider porting DetaolB to non-x86 CPUs?
ok, I documented myself, and I'll try on sparc32.
any hint on patches, config files for the kernel ?
will uclibc work well enough
DetaolB aimed to be a much-less-than-a-floppy x86 linux live distro.
Now, it's evolving more into a-la-slax type of distro.
DetaolB v0.4 has been released 29th,June 2007 on sf.net
=
http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=140321package_id=155481release_id=519786
Mailing list:
based on what you wrote earlier, this is a X11 native application,
using the gtk+ widget set (you did not mention if it is gtk-1 or
gtk-2, this is important...)
- to move it to gtkfb, you'll need code modification. That means
finding all x11 calls and change them into their equivalent for
On 6/18/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
but isnt kdrive same as TinyX which will need me to rewrite the code?
kdrive is only a cut-down version of the X11 server, running either on
framebuffer or on vesa. it's still a standard X server.
What you need is to have compiled Xlib for
On 6/16/07, Rob Landley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thursday 14 June 2007 17:13:32 Christian MICHON wrote:
* /proc/miniconfig.gz: main ideas from Rob Landley, need documentation
Actually, there was documentation for this before there was code. You can
follow my development of the concept
On 6/14/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
when i build a c++ compiler in the native toolchain(using buildroot)...the
size(~80MB) is 4 times as large as when i just build a c compiler...i
noticed that this is mainly because of two precompiled header files
o0g.gch and 02g.gch in
On 6/12/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I could use a pre-compiled development system which will give me a native
compiler. But I want to compile it myself from the source(and hopefully
learn something along the way :D). How do I compile gcc such that it is
linked to the uclibc
On 5/25/07, rafael2k [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Christian!
thanks for the great mini-distro ;)
it's actually a way of paying backwards the great work of many developers
in uclibc. I hope you can use it and feedback to its own mailing list.
Is there any floppy disk image, for old computers?
Hi lists,
DetaolB is a small live x86 distro, entirely uclibc/busybox based,
to be run either on real hardware or inside qemu. With a modified
kernel, it can also run in colinux and will soon self-build this way.
it's (at least today) at the bleeding edge of uclibc and linux kernel.
there are
52 matches
Mail list logo
