From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <4433F441.2080309@domain.hid> Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2006 18:45:53 +0200 From: Philippe Gerum MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Xenomai-help] Questions porting existing rtai-24.1.12 app to xenomai (PART II) References: <1CFEB358338412458B21FAA0D78FE86D042A2FEE@rennsmail02.eu.thmulti.com> <44328187.6080005@domain.hid> <44327F66.10800@domain.hid> <44329186.3080908@domain.hid> <44329D27.1000400@domain.hid> <4433DC01.6060104@domain.hid> In-Reply-To: <4433DC01.6060104@domain.hid> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: Help regarding installation and common use of Xenomai List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Randy Smith Cc: xenomai@xenomai.org Randy Smith wrote: > > > Philippe Gerum wrote: > >> >> Ok, just to be 100% sure, I've just tried the following on a stock >> 2.1.0 grabbed from the mirror: >> >> ../somewhere/xenomai-2.1.0/configure --build=i686-linux >> --host=ppc-linux --prefix=$HOME/xenomai-install CC=ppc_82xx-gcc >> CXX=ppc_82xx-gcc AR=ppc_82xx-ar LD=ppc_82xx-ld >> >> The resulting tree builds and install fine under $HOME/xenomai-install >> afterwards. There is no kernel dependency whatsoever since the >> user-space support does not even know about the kernel version which >> is going to be used in the first place, so we should be able to get >> the same user-space setup. Could you try rebuilding in a clean build >> tree using equivalent switches at config time, and let me know of the >> outcome? TIA, >> > Philippe, > > Thanks for your patient help. I did what you asked and it works fine > for the user side. > > The kernel side is what is screwed up. I am using the ELDK 3.1 from the > DENX CD and when I try applying the Adeos patch, it fails in several > places. I ended up applying the patch by hand and I only had a few > places where I was scratching my head as to where to apply the changes > so that might be what I screwed up. Is the > xenomai-2.1.0/ksrc/arch/powerpc/patches/adeos-ipipe-2.4.25-ppc-denx-1.0-03.patch > supposed to apply to the develop tree for ELDK 3.1 instead?? I couldn't > make heads or tails of the numbering scheme used on the patch wrt the > "denx-1.0-03" part. Wrt 2.4 kernels, the project provides patches against snapshots of Denx's development tree, accessible from http://www.denx.de/en/Software/CVS. The date of the snapshot was missing in the patch filenames, which introduced a fair amount of confusion; this has been fixed in the repository. All 2.4-based Adeos patches for ppc have been built against Denx's devel tree as of 2005-11-09 so far. The Adeos version is always given by the trailing rev. number of any patch filename, e.g. 1.0-04 is the latest Adeos rev. for 2.4/ppc kernels. For 2.6/ppc kernels, we provide patches against vanilla kernel trees as released by kernel.org. > I'm so close...and I really want to figure this out. > Ok, it's a bit early for Xmas gifts, but anyway, try this patch on 2.4.25-11 as shipped with the ELDK 3.1: http://download.gna.org/adeos/patches/v2.4/ppc/adeos-ipipe-2.4.25-11-ppc-denx-1.0-04.patch -- Philippe.