Bernd Schmidt <ber...@codesourcery.com> wrote: On 03/04/2011 11:22 PM, Bernhard Reutner-Fischer wrote: > Bernd Schmidt <ber...@codesourcery.com> wrote: > > I've cleaned up a few issues in the previous version of these > patches, such as those pointed out by Bernhard, a numer of > whitespace issues, and some dead code. Mark Salter has also pointed > out that the FINISH_BOOTSTRAP_RELOC macro isn't actually needed when > ld.so <http://ld.so> is built with gcc, so I've removed that as > well. Bernd >_____________________________________________ > uClibc mailing list uClibc@uclibc.org > > http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/uclibc > > > Hi, > > The port is ok > but I am not convinced about the xdr change, API-wise. Thanks. I've committed > patches 1-4, 7. As for the xdr change - it fixes incorrect code, and I offer > http://www.mail-archive.com/uclibc@uclibc.org/msg05574.html as evidence that > not just the C6X port is affected. I don't know much about RPC code. I've had > a bit of a grep inside uClinux-dist to find instances of functions that are > cast to xdrproc_t. These are in portmap, mysql, and busybox - all of these > seem to take two arguments only. Googling suggests that the function that > wants three arguments is xdr_string, and for that, xdr_wrapstring exists. > What about patch 5, the fallthrough bits? This seems to have been fixed in > glibc in commit f0ccf6ea41931f325df4699a4c7fdf81888563ee. Bernd
Hi Bernd, Patch 5 is ok too. As to xdrproc_t, doesn't that change API WRT both manpage as well as glibc? _______________________________________________ uClibc mailing list uClibc@uclibc.org http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/uclibc
