* [Buildroot] Problem with iperf
@ 2008-02-27 15:32 Nicola Salvemini
2008-02-27 15:52 ` Rex Ashbaugh
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Nicola Salvemini @ 2008-02-27 15:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: buildroot
Hi all,
I have a ARM arm926t (it's a little-endian) target platform and I use buildroot to cross-compile applications.
I include iperf in the package selection for the target and the build phase go to the end without problems, but when I try to use iperf on the target, I take an exception:
NWFPE: iperf[770] takes exception 00000002 at c00288f0 from 400f4580
NWFPE: iperf[770] takes exception 00000002 at c00288f0 from 400f4580
NWFPE: iperf[770] takes exception 00000002 at c00288f0 from 400f4580
Could you please give me an idea to resolve the problem?
Thanks in advance,
Nicola.
___________________________________
L'email della prossima generazione? Puoi averla con la nuova Yahoo! Mail: http://it.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Buildroot] Problem with iperf
2008-02-27 15:32 Nicola Salvemini
@ 2008-02-27 15:52 ` Rex Ashbaugh
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Rex Ashbaugh @ 2008-02-27 15:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: buildroot
NWFPE is the floating point emulator.
00000002 is a floating point divide-by-zero.
try another version of iperf maybe?
report this problem to the iperf maintainer?
-Rex
On 2/27/08, Nicola Salvemini <nicolasalvemini@yahoo.it> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I have a ARM arm926t (it's a little-endian) target platform and I use
> buildroot to cross-compile applications.
> I include iperf in the package selection for the target and the build
> phase go to the end without problems, but when I try to use iperf on the
> target, I take an exception:
>
> NWFPE: iperf[770] takes exception 00000002 at c00288f0 from 400f4580
> NWFPE: iperf[770] takes exception 00000002 at c00288f0 from 400f4580
> NWFPE: iperf[770] takes exception 00000002 at c00288f0 from 400f4580
>
> Could you please give me an idea to resolve the problem?
> Thanks in advance,
>
>
> Nicola.
>
>
>
>
>
> ___________________________________
> L'email della prossima generazione? Puoi averla con la nuova Yahoo! Mail:
> http://it.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html
>
> _______________________________________________
> buildroot mailing list
> buildroot at uclibc.org
> http://busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://busybox.net/lists/buildroot/attachments/20080227/b090f3e5/attachment.htm
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Buildroot] Problem with iperf
[not found] <337959.75035.qm@web23402.mail.ird.yahoo.com>
@ 2008-02-28 15:33 ` Rex Ashbaugh
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Rex Ashbaugh @ 2008-02-28 15:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: buildroot
Also, check how your cross compiler is configured for floating point
handling..
http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/mailinglists/faq.php
3. I feel really confused about what's the difference with gcc
soft-float support and the kernel NWFPE/FastFPE support?
[31 January 2004 - np]
Scenario 1 (hard-float): The compiler emits opcodes designed to
be used with a hardware floating point coprocessor (FPU). The
FPU usually has a set of extra registers for its use, and the
compiler may as well pass floating point argument to functions
through those registers. This is of course the best performing
solution when a real hardware FPU is used.
Scenario 2 (soft-float): the compiler converts floating point
operations into function calls and a special library is used to
provide all functions performing the required operations, all
in software with no FPU instructions at all. There is obviously
no extra floating point registers available in this case,
therefore all FP arguments to functions have to be passed
through standard registers or on the stack. This is of course
the best performing solution when no hardware FPU is available,
given that the library implementing the FP operations is
optimally coded.
Now, unfortunately, the default on ARM Linux has traditionally
been set to have the compiler use hard-float, even if ARM Linux
never ran on any ARM CPU with a real hardware FPU. The CPU is
therefore raising the invalid instruction exception each time
some FPU opcode is encountered. Then the kernel traps that
exception, looks at the given FPU instruction and emulates it
in software. But here not only the kernel must perform the FP
operation, it must emulates the whole hardware FPU as well.
That's what NWFPE or FastFPE are doing. This is obviously the
worst performing arrangement that can be due to the exception
trap and emulation overhead
On 2/28/08, Nicola Salvemini <nicolasalvemini@yahoo.it> wrote:
>
> Hi Rex,
>
> Yes I tried with the previous version (2.0.1) of iperf, bat I had same
> results.
> I'm waiting for a replay from iperf maintainer.
> Best regards,
>
> Nicola.
>
> ----- Messaggio originale -----
> Da: Rex Ashbaugh <rexa@xeratech.com>
> A: Nicola Salvemini <nicolasalvemini@yahoo.it>
> Cc: buildroot at uclibc.org
> Inviato: Mercoled? 27 febbraio 2008, 16:52:03
> Oggetto: Re: [Buildroot] Problem with iperf
>
>
> NWFPE is the floating point emulator.
>
> 00000002 is a floating point divide-by-zero.
>
> try another version of iperf maybe?
> report this problem to the iperf maintainer?
> -Rex
>
>
> On 2/27/08, Nicola Salvemini <nicolasalvemini@yahoo.it> wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I have a ARM arm926t (it's a little-endian) target platform and I use
> > buildroot to cross-compile applications.
> > I include iperf in the package selection for the target and the build
> > phase go to the end without problems, but when I try to use iperf on the
> > target, I take an exception:
> >
> > NWFPE: iperf[770] takes exception 00000002 at c00288f0 from 400f4580
> > NWFPE: iperf[770] takes exception 00000002 at c00288f0 from 400f4580
> > NWFPE: iperf[770] takes exception 00000002 at c00288f0 from 400f4580
> >
> > Could you please give me an idea to resolve the problem?
> > Thanks in advance,
> >
> >
> > Nicola.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ___________________________________
> > L'email della prossima generazione? Puoi averla con la nuova Yahoo!
> > Mail: http://it.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html<http://it.docs..yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > buildroot mailing list
> > buildroot at uclibc.org
> > http://busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot
> >
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> ------------------------------
> L'email della prossima generazione? Puoi averla con la nuova Yahoo! Mail<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/mail/it/taglines/hotmail/nowyoucan/nextgen/*http://it.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://busybox.net/lists/buildroot/attachments/20080228/8df3feb6/attachment.htm
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Buildroot] Problem with iperf
@ 2008-02-28 16:28 Nicola Salvemini
2008-02-28 17:21 ` Rex Ashbaugh
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Nicola Salvemini @ 2008-02-28 16:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: buildroot
Yes,
I tried to select option "Use software floating point by default" from buildroot configuration menu, but I have some compilation problems:
/home/user/buildroot/build_arm/staging_dir/usr/arm-linux-uclibc/bin/ld: ERROR: libgcc/./_udivsi3_s.o uses hardware FP, whereas ./libgcc_s.so.1.tmp uses software FP
/home/user/buildroot/build_arm/staging_dir/usr/arm-linux-uclibc/bin/ld: failed to merge target specific data of file libgcc/./_udivsi3_s.o
/home/user/buildroot/build_arm/staging_dir/usr/arm-linux-uclibc/bin/ld: ERROR: libgcc/./_divsi3_s.o uses hardware FP, whereas ./libgcc_s.so.1.tmp uses software FP
/home/user/buildroot/build_arm/staging_dir/usr/arm-linux-uclibc/bin/ld: failed to merge target specific data of file libgcc/./_divsi3_s.o
....
etcetera...
Best regards,
Nicola.
----- Messaggio originale -----
Da: Rex Ashbaugh <rexa@xeratech.com>
A: Nicola Salvemini <nicolasalvemini@yahoo.it>
Cc: buildroot at uclibc.org
Inviato: Gioved? 28 febbraio 2008, 16:33:19
Oggetto: Re: [Buildroot] Problem with iperf
Also, check how your cross compiler is configured for floating point handling..
http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/mailinglists/faq.php
3. I feel really confused about what's the difference with gcc
soft-float support and the kernel NWFPE/FastFPE support?
[31 January 2004 - np]
Scenario 1 (hard-float): The compiler emits opcodes designed to
be used with a hardware floating point coprocessor (FPU). The
FPU usually has a set of extra registers for its use, and the
compiler may as well pass floating point argument to functions
through those registers. This is of course the best performing
solution when a real hardware FPU is used.
Scenario 2 (soft-float): the compiler converts floating point
operations into function calls and a special library is used to
provide all functions performing the required operations, all
in software with no FPU instructions at all. There is obviously
no extra floating point registers available in this case,
therefore all FP arguments to functions have to be passed
through standard registers or on the stack. This is of course
the best performing solution when no hardware FPU is available,
given that the library implementing the FP operations is
optimally coded.
Now, unfortunately, the default on ARM Linux has traditionally
been set to have the compiler use hard-float, even if ARM Linux
never ran on any ARM CPU with a real hardware FPU. The CPU is
therefore raising the invalid instruction exception each time
some FPU opcode is encountered. Then the kernel traps that
exception, looks at the given FPU instruction and emulates it
in software. But here not only the kernel must perform the FP
operation, it must emulates the whole hardware FPU as well.
That's what NWFPE or FastFPE are doing. This is obviously the
worst performing arrangement that can be due to the exception
trap and emulation overhead
On 2/28/08, Nicola Salvemini <nicolasalvemini@yahoo.it> wrote:
Hi Rex,
Yes I tried with the previous version (2.0.1) of iperf, bat I had same results.
I'm waiting for a replay from iperf maintainer.
Best regards,
Nicola.
----- Messaggio originale -----
Da: Rex Ashbaugh <rexa@xeratech.com>
A: Nicola Salvemini <nicolasalvemini@yahoo.it>
Cc: buildroot at uclibc.org
Inviato: Mercoled? 27 febbraio 2008, 16:52:03
Oggetto: Re: [Buildroot] Problem with iperf
NWFPE is the floating point emulator.
00000002 is a floating point divide-by-zero.
try another version of iperf maybe?
report this problem to the iperf maintainer?
-Rex
On 2/27/08, Nicola Salvemini <nicolasalvemini@yahoo.it> wrote:
Hi all,
I have a ARM arm926t (it's a little-endian) target platform and I use buildroot to cross-compile applications.
I include iperf in the package selection for the target and the build phase go to the end without problems, but when I try to use iperf on the target, I take an exception:
NWFPE: iperf[770] takes exception 00000002 at c00288f0 from 400f4580
NWFPE: iperf[770] takes exception 00000002 at c00288f0 from 400f4580
NWFPE: iperf[770] takes exception 00000002 at c00288f0 from 400f4580
Could you please give me an idea to resolve the problem?
Thanks in advance,
Nicola.
___________________________________
L'email della prossima generazione? Puoi averla con la nuova Yahoo! Mail: http://it.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html
_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot at uclibc.org
http://busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot
L'email della prossima generazione? Puoi averla con la nuova Yahoo! Mail
___________________________________
L'email della prossima generazione? Puoi averla con la nuova Yahoo! Mail: http://it.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://busybox.net/lists/buildroot/attachments/20080228/a786832e/attachment-0001.htm
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Buildroot] Problem with iperf
2008-02-28 16:28 [Buildroot] Problem with iperf Nicola Salvemini
@ 2008-02-28 17:21 ` Rex Ashbaugh
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Rex Ashbaugh @ 2008-02-28 17:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: buildroot
hmm, looks like "_udivsi3_s.o" (built with hardware FP) was built prior to
your new configuration selection of software FP.
you may need to clean buildroot, or start over.
just in case, my suggestion is you probably want to preserve the buildroot
directory you have,
then start a new test buildroot directory and use the correct FP config to
see if this will prevent the error below.
On 2/28/08, Nicola Salvemini <nicolasalvemini@yahoo.it> wrote:
>
> Yes,
> I tried to select option "Use software floating point by default" from
> buildroot configuration menu, but I have some compilation problems:
>
> /home/user/buildroot/build_arm/staging_dir/usr/arm-linux-uclibc/bin/ld:
> ERROR: libgcc/./_udivsi3_s.o uses hardware FP, whereas ./libgcc_s.so.1.tmp
> uses software FP
> /home/user/buildroot/build_arm/staging_dir/usr/arm-linux-uclibc/bin/ld:
> failed to merge target specific data of file libgcc/./_udivsi3_s.o
> /home/user/buildroot/build_arm/staging_dir/usr/arm-linux-uclibc/bin/ld:
> ERROR: libgcc/./_divsi3_s.o uses hardware FP, whereas ./libgcc_s.so.1.tmp
> uses software FP
> /home/user/buildroot/build_arm/staging_dir/usr/arm-linux-uclibc/bin/ld:
> failed to merge target specific data of file libgcc/./_divsi3_s.o
>
> ....
>
> etcetera...
>
> Best regards,
> Nicola.
>
>
> ----- Messaggio originale -----
> Da: Rex Ashbaugh <rexa@xeratech.com>
> A: Nicola Salvemini <nicolasalvemini@yahoo.it>
> Cc: buildroot at uclibc.org
> Inviato: Gioved? 28 febbraio 2008, 16:33:19
> Oggetto: Re: [Buildroot] Problem with iperf
>
> Also, check how your cross compiler is configured for floating point
> handling..
>
> http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/mailinglists/faq.php
>
> 3. I feel really confused about what's the difference with gcc
>
> soft-float support and the kernel NWFPE/FastFPE support?
> [31 January 2004 - np]
> Scenario 1 (hard-float): The compiler emits opcodes designed to
>
> be used with a hardware floating point coprocessor (FPU). The
>
> FPU usually has a set of extra registers for its use, and the
> compiler may as well pass floating point argument to functions
> through those registers. This is of course the best performing
>
> solution when a real hardware FPU is used.
>
> Scenario 2 (soft-float): the compiler converts floating point
> operations into function calls and a special library is used to
> provide all functions performing the required operations, all
>
> in software with no FPU instructions at all. There is obviously
> no extra floating point registers available in this case,
> therefore all FP arguments to functions have to be passed
>
> through standard registers or on the stack. This is of course
> the best performing solution when no
> hardware FPU is available,
> given that the library implementing the FP operations is
>
> optimally coded.
>
> Now, unfortunately, the default on ARM Linux has traditionally
> been set to have the compiler use hard-float, even if ARM Linux
> never ran on any ARM CPU with a real hardware FPU. The CPU is
>
> therefore raising the invalid instruction exception each time
> some FPU opcode is encountered. Then the kernel traps that
> exception, looks at the given FPU instruction and emulates it
>
> in software. But here not only the kernel must perform the FP
> operation, it must emulates the whole hardware FPU as well.
> That's what NWFPE or FastFPE are doing. This is obviously the
>
> worst performing arrangement that can be due to the exception
> trap and emulation
> overhead
>
>
>
> On 2/28/08, Nicola Salvemini <nicolasalvemini@yahoo.it> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Rex,
> >
> > Yes I tried with the previous version (2.0.1) of iperf, bat I had same
> > results.
> > I'm waiting for a replay from iperf maintainer.
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Nicola.
> >
> > ----- Messaggio originale -----
> > Da: Rex Ashbaugh <rexa@xeratech.com>
> > A: Nicola Salvemini <nicolasalvemini@yahoo.it>
> > Cc: buildroot at uclibc.org
> > Inviato: Mercoled? 27 febbraio 2008, 16:52:03
> > Oggetto: Re: [Buildroot] Problem with iperf
> >
> >
> > NWFPE is the floating point emulator.
> >
> > 00000002 is a floating point divide-by-zero.
> >
> > try another version of iperf maybe?
> > report this problem to the iperf maintainer?
> > -Rex
> >
> >
> > On 2/27/08, Nicola Salvemini <nicolasalvemini@yahoo.it> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > I have a ARM arm926t (it's a little-endian) target platform and I use
> > > buildroot to cross-compile applications.
> > > I include iperf in the package selection for the target and the build
> > > phase go to the end without problems, but when I try to use iperf on the
> > > target, I take an exception:
> > >
> > > NWFPE: iperf[770] takes exception 00000002 at c00288f0 from 400f4580
> > > NWFPE: iperf[770] takes exception 00000002 at c00288f0 from 400f4580
> > > NWFPE: iperf[770] takes exception 00000002 at c00288f0 from 400f4580
> > >
> > > Could you please give me an idea to resolve the problem?
> > > Thanks in advance,
> > >
> > >
> > > Nicola.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ___________________________________
> > > L'email della prossima generazione? Puoi averla con la nuova Yahoo!
> > > Mail: http://it.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html<http://it.docs..yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html>
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > buildroot mailing list
> > > buildroot at uclibc.org
> > > http://busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> > ------------------------------
> > L'email della prossima generazione? Puoi averla con la nuova Yahoo! Mail<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/mail/it/taglines/hotmail/nowyoucan/nextgen/*http://it.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html>
> >
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> ------------------------------
> L'email della prossima generazione? Puoi averla con la nuova Yahoo! Mail<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/mail/it/taglines/hotmail/nowyoucan/nextgen/*http://it.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://busybox.net/lists/buildroot/attachments/20080228/75570fb2/attachment.htm
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [Buildroot] Problem with iperf
@ 2008-02-29 15:07 Nicola Salvemini
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Nicola Salvemini @ 2008-02-29 15:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: buildroot
Hi Rex,
thanks for your advice! This was helpful.
I tried to use 'make clean' command to clean buildroot but, obviously, it was not appropriate!
However I have now another problem.
After some iteration, iperf stops with some TX underrun ethernet errors:
eth0: TX underrun, resetting buffer
After a brief research I understood that this is a know problem for AT91SAM9260 processor (https://linuxlink.timesys.com/forum/2119), and I'm trying for resolve it.
Thank you very much for your help,
best regards,
Nicola.
----- Messaggio originale -----
Da: Rex Ashbaugh <rexa@xeratech.com>
A: Nicola Salvemini <nicolasalvemini@yahoo.it>
Cc: buildroot at uclibc.org
Inviato: Gioved? 28 febbraio 2008, 18:21:31
Oggetto: Re: [Buildroot] Problem with iperf
hmm, looks like "_udivsi3_s.o" (built with hardware FP) was built prior to your new configuration selection of software FP.
you may need to clean buildroot, or start over.
just in case, my suggestion is you probably want to preserve the buildroot directory you have,
then start a new test buildroot directory and use the correct FP config to see if this will prevent the error below.
On 2/28/08, Nicola Salvemini <nicolasalvemini@yahoo.it> wrote:Yes,
I tried to select option "Use software floating point by default" from buildroot configuration menu, but I have some compilation problems:
/home/user/buildroot/build_arm/staging_dir/usr/arm-linux-uclibc/bin/ld: ERROR: libgcc/./_udivsi3_s.o uses hardware FP, whereas ./libgcc_s.so.1.tmp uses software FP
/home/user/buildroot/build_arm/staging_dir/usr/arm-linux-uclibc/bin/ld: failed to merge target specific data of file libgcc/./_udivsi3_s.o
/home/user/buildroot/build_arm/staging_dir/usr/arm-linux-uclibc/bin/ld: ERROR: libgcc/./_divsi3_s.o uses hardware FP, whereas ./libgcc_s.so.1.tmp uses software FP
/home/user/buildroot/build_arm/staging_dir/usr/arm-linux-uclibc/bin/ld: failed to merge target specific data of file libgcc/./_divsi3_s.o
....
etcetera...
Best regards,
Nicola.
----- Messaggio originale -----
Da: Rex Ashbaugh <rexa@xeratech.com>
A: Nicola Salvemini <nicolasalvemini@yahoo.it>
Cc: buildroot at uclibc.org
Inviato: Gioved? 28 febbraio 2008, 16:33:19
Oggetto: Re: [Buildroot] Problem with iperf
Also, check how your cross compiler is configured for floating point handling..
http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/mailinglists/faq.php
3. I feel really confused about what's the difference with gcc
soft-float support and the kernel NWFPE/FastFPE support?
[31 January 2004 - np]
Scenario 1 (hard-float): The compiler emits opcodes designed to
be used with a hardware floating point coprocessor (FPU). The
FPU usually has a set of extra registers for its use, and the
compiler may as well pass floating point argument to functions
through those registers. This is of course the best performing
solution when a real hardware FPU is used.
Scenario 2 (soft-float): the compiler converts floating point
operations into function calls and a special library is used to
provide all functions performing the required operations, all
in software with no FPU instructions at all. There is obviously
no extra floating point registers available in this case,
therefore all FP arguments to functions have to be passed
through standard registers or on the stack. This is of course
the best performing solution when no
hardware FPU is available,
given that the library implementing the FP operations is
optimally coded.
Now, unfortunately, the default on ARM Linux has traditionally
been set to have the compiler use hard-float, even if ARM Linux
never ran on any ARM CPU with a real hardware FPU. The CPU is
therefore raising the invalid instruction exception each time
some FPU opcode is encountered. Then the kernel traps that
exception, looks at the given FPU instruction and emulates it
in software. But here not only the kernel must perform the FP
operation, it must emulates the whole hardware FPU as well.
That's what NWFPE or FastFPE are doing. This is obviously the
worst performing arrangement that can be due to the exception
trap and emulation
overhead
On 2/28/08, Nicola Salvemini <nicolasalvemini@yahoo.it> wrote:Hi Rex,
Yes I tried with the previous version (2.0.1) of iperf, bat I had same results.
I'm waiting for a replay from iperf maintainer..
Best regards,
Nicola.
----- Messaggio originale -----
Da: Rex Ashbaugh <rexa@xeratech.com>
A: Nicola Salvemini <nicolasalvemini@yahoo.it>
Cc: buildroot at uclibc.org
Inviato: Mercoled? 27 febbraio 2008, 16:52:03
Oggetto: Re: [Buildroot] Problem with iperf
NWFPE is the floating point emulator.
00000002 is a floating point divide-by-zero.
try another version of iperf maybe?
report this problem to the iperf maintainer?
-Rex
On 2/27/08, Nicola Salvemini <nicolasalvemini@yahoo.it> wrote:Hi all,
I have a ARM arm926t (it's a little-endian) target platform and I use buildroot to cross-compile applications.
I include iperf in the package selection for the target and the build phase go to the end without problems, but when I try to use iperf on the target, I take an exception:
NWFPE: iperf[770] takes exception 00000002 at c00288f0 from 400f4580
NWFPE: iperf[770] takes exception 00000002 at c00288f0 from 400f4580
NWFPE: iperf[770] takes exception 00000002 at c00288f0 from 400f4580
Could you please give me an idea to resolve the problem?
Thanks in advance,
Nicola.
___________________________________
L'email della prossima generazione? Puoi averla con la nuova Yahoo! Mail: http://it.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html
_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot at uclibc.org
http://busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot
L'email della prossima generazione? Puoi averla con la nuova Yahoo! Mail
L'email della prossima generazione? Puoi averla con la nuova Yahoo! Mail
___________________________________
L'email della prossima generazione? Puoi averla con la nuova Yahoo! Mail: http://it.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://busybox.net/lists/buildroot/attachments/20080229/db0b1573/attachment-0001.htm
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2008-02-29 15:07 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2008-02-28 16:28 [Buildroot] Problem with iperf Nicola Salvemini
2008-02-28 17:21 ` Rex Ashbaugh
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2008-02-29 15:07 Nicola Salvemini
[not found] <337959.75035.qm@web23402.mail.ird.yahoo.com>
2008-02-28 15:33 ` Rex Ashbaugh
2008-02-27 15:32 Nicola Salvemini
2008-02-27 15:52 ` Rex Ashbaugh
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox