From: Carlos Santos <casantos@datacom.ind.br>
To: buildroot@busybox.net
Subject: [Buildroot] Why is libbsd limited to ARM, x86 and x86_64?
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2016 13:39:51 -0200 (BRST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1351688359.878304.1454513991848.JavaMail.zimbra@datacom.ind.br> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56B11B08.2070306@mind.be>
> From: "Arnout Vandecappelle" <arnout@mind.be>
> To: "Carlos Santos" <casantos@datacom.ind.br>, "buildroot" <buildroot@buildroot.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 2, 2016 7:09:28 PM
> Subject: Re: [Buildroot] Why is libbsd limited to ARM, x86 and x86_64?
> On 02-02-16 16:30, Carlos Santos wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I'm working on a project for PowerPC in which libbsd would be useful. However
>> the package is restricted to ARM, x86 and x86_64 architectures, since Config.in
>> contains this:
>>
>> # libbsd requires a.out.h, which is only available for those
>> # architectures: arm, x86 (and alpha, currently not supported in Buildroot;
>> # also m68k which is currently not enabled, so can't be tested.)
>> default y if BR2_arm || BR2_i386 || BR2_x86_64
>>
>> However, my PowerPC toolchain, generated by crosstool-NG, provides the required
>> a.out.h file. It is based on GCC 4.8.2, GLIBC 2.19 and Kernel 3.10.47.
>>
>> Where does the information about the missing a.out.h on PowerPC comes from?
>
> I had to do some archeology for this one :-)
>
> This exclusion was from the time that we only supported glibc for external
> toolchains and it didn't get too much attention. So we missed the fact that
> glibc doesn't include linux/a.out.h so you won't get this[1] error. And it also
> seems that libbsd doesn't really require a.out support in the architecture (PPC
> doesn't support a.out), it just needs the a.out.h file to be present (in uClibc,
> a.out.h includes linux/a.out.h; in glibc, it doesn't). So for glibc, it works on
> any architecture.
>
> Sometime later, the bump to 0.6.0 made libbsd require a glibc toolchain [2].
> But of course, nobody noticed that this meant that the architecture dependencies
> are no longer needed.
>
> So it would be great if you could prepare a patch that removes the arch
> dependency and test if libbsd builds on all the arches that have glibc: aarch64,
> mips, sh, microblaze, sparc, nios2.
>
> Regards,
> Arnout
> [1]
> http://autobuild.buildroot.org/results/019/019091312ec547520370ffad967b53e23f54a14b/
> [2]
> http://autobuild.buildroot.net/results/e94/e949d8fabeeecc74bd1c324c516e0b4938c99dbc/
OK, I will submit a patch.
Carlos Santos (Casantos)
DATACOM, P&D
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-02-03 15:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-02-02 15:30 [Buildroot] Why is libbsd limited to ARM, x86 and x86_64? Carlos Santos
2016-02-02 21:09 ` Arnout Vandecappelle
2016-02-03 15:39 ` Carlos Santos [this message]
2016-02-03 18:50 ` Carlos Santos
2016-02-04 0:00 ` Arnout Vandecappelle
2016-02-04 5:21 ` Baruch Siach
2016-02-04 12:22 ` Carlos Santos
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1351688359.878304.1454513991848.JavaMail.zimbra@datacom.ind.br \
--to=casantos@datacom.ind.br \
--cc=buildroot@busybox.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox