On Thu, 2010-06-17 at 18:10 +0800, jason duhamell wrote:
> I posted a job to port nationalchip to linux. here is the link.
>
> http://groups.google.com.au/group/szlug/browse_thread/thread/5bd00cc185c48c76
> ___
> uClibc mailing list
> uClibc@uclibc.org
>
On Wed, 2009-07-08 at 08:13 +0200, Natanael Copa wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-07-07 at 05:42 +0300, Cristi Magherusan wrote:
> > Hi there,
> >
> > I'm trying to compile kvm using uClibc instead of glibc.
>
> I upgraded to kvm-87 yesterday. It compiles, kvm is enabled,
On Tue, 2009-07-07 at 10:31 -0500, Javier Guerra wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 6:31 AM, Cristi
> Magherusan wrote:
> > The kernel will be 2.6.24 because it's smaller. I know this mismatch may
> > not be good, but I have to get to a compromise. The kernel needs to be
&
On Tue, 2009-07-07 at 12:12 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 07/07/2009 05:42 AM, Cristi Magherusan wrote:
> > Hi there,
> >
> > I'm trying to compile kvm using uClibc instead of glibc.
> >
> > Besides the fact that kvm needs "--extra-ldflags=-lrt&quo
On Tue, 2009-07-07 at 09:34 +0200, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 06, 2009 at 11:21:03PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> >On Monday 06 July 2009 22:42:46 Cristi Magherusan wrote:
> >> /home/cristi/devel/avatt/buildroot/build_i586/kvm-87/qemu-kvm-x86.c:1538:
> &
Hi there,
I'm trying to compile kvm using uClibc instead of glibc.
Besides the fact that kvm needs "--extra-ldflags=-lrt" (otherwise there
are some missing symbols), there's an error caused by another missing
symbol that I was unable to fix yet. It's about ioperm, and this is the
error I get:
/h
On Mon, 2009-06-29 at 11:48 +0200, Matteo Petracca wrote:
> Hello,
> I am trying to use the nptl branch with i386 support
> added by Timo through the patch:
>
> http://solidboot.com/~fabled/uclibc-nptl-i386.diff
>
> It works and the system compiles, but I am having
> some issues in using the lrin
On Sat, 2009-07-04 at 19:18 +0430, Rolf wrote:
> I downloaded, configured and built the 'buildroot-2009.05' system
> and used the resulting 'rootfs' images to boot a stripped down kernel.
>
> Great job 'uClibc' & 'busybox' teams!...great tools!
>
> My question:
>
> I downloaded all of the 'uCli
On Fri, 2009-07-03 at 15:21 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Thursday 04 June 2009 08:33:34 Ingo van Lil wrote:
> > The __syscall_error() function stores the errno value in the edx
> > register before invoking the __set_errno() macro. When using the
> > pthread library this macro calls thread_self
Hello,
I'm attempting to compile the x86 version of uClibc-nptl using buildroot
(it compiles by itself). I have modified buildroot a bit to allow it
fetch my uClibc nptl snapshot, patched using Timo's x86 patch, but I'm
having some compilation issues.
It seems currently the x86 version won't comp
Hello,
On Fri, 2009-04-10 at 01:33 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Friday 10 April 2009 01:07:52 Timo Teräs wrote:
> > Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > > On Thursday 09 April 2009 10:24:53 Cristi Magherusan wrote:
> > >> Is there anyone interested in porting
Hello,
Is there anyone interested in porting the NPTL branch to x86/x86-64?
Regards,
Cristi
--
Ing. Cristi Măgherușan, System/Network Engineer
Technical University of Cluj-Napoca, Romania
http://cc.utcluj.ro +40264 401247
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
On Wed, 2008-10-15 at 12:15 +0200, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 02:01:58PM +0400, Vladimir Dronnikov wrote:
> >Hi,
> >
> >Where from can I download fresh rootfs for x86? Or this is not supported
> >any more?
>
> I have this:
> http://repo.or.cz/w/buildroot.git/
>
> I'
On Mon, 2008-09-15 at 17:57 +0200, Carmelo AMOROSO wrote:
> Rob Landley wrote:
> > On Thursday 28 August 2008 09:25:32 Carmelo AMOROSO wrote:
> >> Looking at what we have into the nptl branch is useful.
> >> Walk trough ldso directory and look for USE_TLS to see where you should
> >> put your hands
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
>
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
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 well on x86?
>
> None, only mips, arm and sh4 have nptl support.
Can
Hello,
Can anyone tell which revision of the NPTL branch is tested and
confirmed to work well on x86? Also, a new status report for the merge
with the NPTL branch would be greatly appreciated.
The current HEAD is failing to build with this message:
GEN libpthread/nptl/pthread-errnos.c
CC lib
Hello,
On Mon, 2008-08-11 at 10:12 -0400, Chris Metcalf wrote:
> On 8/11/2008 8:58 AM, Carmelo Amoroso wrote:
> > Cristi Magherusan wrote:
> >
> >> The ones I know for sure that are missing both from the latest release and
> >> CVS
> >> are the ones t
Hello,
On Fri, 2008-08-08 at 12:15 +0200, Carmelo AMOROSO wrote:
> Cristi Magherusan wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I noticed that the gentoo uclibc ebuild[1] applies a considerable amount
> > of patches[2]. Has anyone investigated how many of them worth including
Hello,
I noticed that the gentoo uclibc ebuild[1] applies a considerable amount
of patches[2]. Has anyone investigated how many of them worth including
in the main uclibc tree? Personally, I'm most interested about the libm
ones, but the other ones may be nice to have too.
Best regards,
Cristi
[
Hello,
It seems my original patch had some errors. The attached patch is fixing
those and is very close to what glibc has, except glibc's stub warnings.
If you really think it should be made a single file, I'll do it later.
Best regards,
Cristi
diff -Naur uClibc-0.9.29/extra/Configs/Config.in uCl
Hello,
On Sat, 2008-07-05 at 11:26 +0200, Bernhard Fischer wrote:
> From a short glance, we want the exact opposite: No stubs but the real
> implementation.
Afaik, there are no public aio_*() syscalls offered by the kernel, and
even glibc has only stubs and no real implementation.
> Also in my P
Hello,
You can find attached the patch that adds into librt optional support
for stubs of the aio functions, as I promised a few days ago.
It's mostly a copy/paste from glibc, with a few modifications needed for
it to compile, I hope I haven't missed anything and that there won't be
license-relat
On Mon, 2008-06-30 at 14:45 +0200, Carmelo AMOROSO wrote:
> this will be appreciated. Please be sure that you will not get
> code from glibc licensed under GPLv3.
The aio from glibc 2.8 is licensed under GPL 2.1 or later. Is that ok?
Cristi
--
Ing. Cristi Măgherușan,
Universitatea Tehnică din C
On Mon, 2008-06-30 at 15:06 +0300, Cristi Magherusan wrote:
> Are there any plans to include aio support in uClibc soon or should I do
> it myself? If so, which difficulty do you estimate for this task?
I took a look at the code of uClibc and glibc and it seems trivial.
I'll soon m
Hello,
As part of my GSoC project, I'm working to include KVM-qemu inside a
coreboot BIOS payload that is using uClibc. The problem I'm currently
facing (I hope there won't be many others) is that uClibc doesn't
provide support for aio and qemu is using it intensively.
Are there any plans to inc
28 matches
Mail list logo
