This is the mail archive of the crossgcc@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the crossgcc project.

See the CrossGCC FAQ for lots more information.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Patch - uClibc [Was: Re: uClibc progress]


Good evening all!

Once upon a time (on Jeudi 21 Juillet 2005 15:39), Dan Kegel wrote :
 > Glad to hear things are working for you!

Hehe! Patience pays, my dad used to say. I was very patient and stubborn.
That paid. Your (Dan, but also others on crossgcc ML) help and advice were
very usefull also! Thanks!

 > > What's left:
 > >  - look at ptxdist patches for binutils and gcc to see if they have *-uclibc
 > >    targets support.
 > Geez, shouldn't that have been one of the first things you did,
 > to avoid duplication?

Hmmm... Err. Yes, but as the easy way, I used buildroot's. I want something
that _works_ so that I _understand_ how it does work. Then I can check how
to do it with ptxdist. Sorry that I'm not doing the things the way you
would. I'm a bit slow at understanding some of those compiler thingys... :-)

 > You should post a work-in-progress patch to the crossgcc list
 > for a couple of reasons:
 > 1) As a backup in case your laptop gets fried again :-)

Pleeaase, don't speak 'bout it! Anyway I had a three-place backup here:
on two drives in the same machine (my server), and one copy on my laptop.
But you can never be too cautious, so here is a patch.

What's in the patch (briefly):
 - preliminary, but functional and quite advanced, uClibc support
 - the two previous patches about silent run and program prefix
 - snapshot and forced download support
 - some cosmetics

An almost comprehensive description is given in the header of the patch.
There might still be glitches, as it is still WIP here. Please report
any problem, any suggestion, flames, or what ever! :-)

 > even if I don't use it in crosstool

Won't you plan to integrate it in crosstool at some point? (I'm not speaking
of 0.38, but later?)

OT: glibc
What I understand from a set of posts a few days ago, glibc tends to drop so
called 'embedded', or 'exotic', targets. Right?
And that you still had a mitigate feeling about the future of crosstool
concerning glibc. Right?
So incorporating alternate C libraries would eventually be the way to go.
(I'm not speaking only of uClibc, but other such as dietlibc or newlib for
example.)
Tell me if/where I'm wrong.

Regards,
Yann E. MORIN.

-- 
.-----------------.--------------------.------------------.--------------------.
|  Yann E. MORIN  | Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics' conspiracy: |
| +0/33 662376056 | Software  Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN     |   ^                |
| --==< °_° >==-- °---.----------------:  X  AGAINST      |  /e\  There is no  |
| web: ymorin.free.fr | SETI@home 3808 | / \ HTML MAIL    |  """  conspiracy.  |
°---------------------°----------------°------------------°--------------------°

Attachment: crosstool-0.37-500.silent-exec.program-prefix.snapshots.uClibc.misc.patch.bz2
Description: BZip2 compressed data

------
Want more information?  See the CrossGCC FAQ, http://www.objsw.com/CrossGCC/
Want to unsubscribe? Send a note to crossgcc-unsubscribe@sources.redhat.com

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]