From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Microbit_Ubuntu Date: Fri, 28 May 2010 07:32:12 +1000 Subject: [Buildroot] Buildroot 2010.05-rc3 released uClibc 0.9.30.1 patches missing ? In-Reply-To: <201005272319.54338.yann.morin.1998@anciens.enib.fr> References: <877hmpv7km.fsf@macbook.be.48ers.dk> <1274994677.436.2.camel@ubuntu> <201005272319.54338.yann.morin.1998@anciens.enib.fr> Message-ID: <1274995932.436.9.camel@ubuntu> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Bonjour Yann, tout le monde, On Thu, 2010-05-27 at 23:19 +0200, Yann E. MORIN wrote: > Kris, All, > > On Thursday 27 May 2010 23:11:17 Microbit_Ubuntu wrote: > > I don;t know if I'm off base here, but I notice that rc3 does not have > > the patches for uClibc 0.9.30.1 at toolchain/uClibc folder in the > > tarball ????? > > Indeed, that because the 0.9.30.x that is used is .3, and .1 is not present > in the version choice, in the menuconfig. See: > toolchain/uClibc/Config.in at 40 > > Regards, > Yann E. MORIN. > Thanks for reviewing. This might have sounded like a dumb question - as of course uClibc was compiled by ct-ng... I haven't yet compiled BR, am about to though. I saw uClibc 0.1.29 patches, so I thought "where's 0.9.30.1 ??". I mean, if 0.9.30.3 is used, why bother with 0.9.29 patches ??? Oh well, false alarm in any case !! The *biggest* problem so far I had was the fact that ct-ng-1.6.1 patches uClibc 0.9.30.1 BUT does NOT apply the ARM sysdep patch. I kept getting "invalid module format" on my target. A rebuild with (indeed) "new" linuxthreads enabled in uClibc of the x-tools toolchain fixed it after manually applying the sysdeps patch !! I'll still reply to your other post as well. Au revoir, Kris