From: Arnout Vandecappelle <arnout@mind.be>
To: buildroot@busybox.net
Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH] toolchain: add support for glibc
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2013 01:26:58 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <52169E42.2040904@mind.be> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130822232633.7ba9b14d@skate>
On 22/08/13 23:26, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> Dear Arnout Vandecappelle,
>
> On Wed, 21 Aug 2013 23:45:06 +0200, Arnout Vandecappelle wrote:
>> On 18/08/13 19:36, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
>>> The support for eglibc 2.17 was added to the internal toolchain
>>> backend for 2013.08. This commit now adds glibc 2.18 support to the
>>> internal toolchain backend. The building procedure is very similar to
>>> the one of eglibc, with a few differences, but the two are kept
>>> separate for now.
>>
>> I'm not sure if that's a good idea... Will merging them later be easier?
>
> I don't know for sure, but the package aren't that complex, so I don't
> think merging would be very difficult.
>
> If I had to merge them, where should I put the common code?
I was thinking to have just one glibc package, with a choice to select
eglibc or glibc.
>
>> [snip]
>>> +define GLIBC_CONFIGURE_CMDS
>>> + mkdir -p $(@D)/build
>>> + # Do the configuration
>>> + (cd $(@D)/build; \
>>> + $(TARGET_CONFIGURE_OPTS) \
>>> + CFLAGS="-O2 $(GLIBC_EXTRA_CFLAGS)" CPPFLAGS="" \
>>
>> The -O2 was required for eglibc. Why do we have it here as well?
>
> I believe yes. At least, Crosstool-NG does it, AFAIK. The glibc and
> eglibc code base are very very similar, so it wouldn't surprise me that
> the same 'constraint' applies on both.
>
>> [snip]
>>> +ifeq ($(BR2_PACKAGE_GDB_SERVER),y)
>>> +GLIBC_LIBS_LIB += libthread_db.so
>>> +endif
>>
>> Shouldn't this lib be installed as well for a gdb without gdbserver?
>> I.e., shouldn't the condition be ifeq ($(BR2_PACKAGE_GDB),y)?
>
> That's a good question, I don't know. At the moment, the ct-ng backend,
> the external backend and the eglibc .mk file all copy libthread_db.so
> when gdbserver is enabled.
To be tested but it'd surprise me if gdb didn't need it.
Regards,
Arnout
--
Arnout Vandecappelle arnout at mind be
Senior Embedded Software Architect +32-16-286500
Essensium/Mind http://www.mind.be
G.Geenslaan 9, 3001 Leuven, Belgium BE 872 984 063 RPR Leuven
LinkedIn profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/arnoutvandecappelle
GPG fingerprint: 7CB5 E4CC 6C2E EFD4 6E3D A754 F963 ECAB 2450 2F1F
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-08-22 23:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-08-18 17:36 [Buildroot] [PATCH] toolchain: add support for glibc Thomas Petazzoni
2013-08-21 21:45 ` Arnout Vandecappelle
2013-08-22 21:26 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-08-22 23:26 ` Arnout Vandecappelle [this message]
2013-08-23 4:48 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-08-28 20:16 ` Arnout Vandecappelle
2013-08-29 7:38 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-08-29 15:54 ` Arnout Vandecappelle
2013-08-30 7:46 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-08-21 21:52 ` Arnout Vandecappelle
2013-08-22 19:42 ` Arnout Vandecappelle
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=52169E42.2040904@mind.be \
--to=arnout@mind.be \
--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