From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Korsgaard Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2012 23:57:22 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [autobuild.buildroot.net] Build results for 2012-04-07 In-Reply-To: <20120410085328.21507bc2@skate> (Thomas Petazzoni's message of "Tue, 10 Apr 2012 08:53:28 +0200") References: <20120408063022.2FA8252CA55@lolut.humanoidz.org> <87lim6u2an.fsf@macbook.be.48ers.dk> <20120410085328.21507bc2@skate> Message-ID: <87y5pyase5.fsf@macbook.be.48ers.dk> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net >>>>> "Thomas" == Thomas Petazzoni writes: Hi, >> What toolchain is this? Gustavoz added uClibc patches for unshare >> support, so if this is uClibc you'll need to rebuild the toolchain. Thomas> Well, according to the defconfig, the toolchain is: Thomas> BR2_TOOLCHAIN_CTNG=y Thomas> BR2_TOOLCHAIN_CTNG_uClibc_LARGEFILE=y Thomas> BR2_TOOLCHAIN_CTNG_uClibc_INET_IPV6=y Thomas> BR2_TOOLCHAIN_CTNG_uClibc_INET_RPC=y Thomas> BR2_TOOLCHAIN_CTNG_uClibc_LOCALE=y Thomas> BR2_TOOLCHAIN_CTNG_CXX=y Thomas> So it's a toolchain generated with our crosstool-NG backend, which Thomas> apparently does not use the uClibc patches we have added for the Thomas> internal backend. No, it doesn't, and I seems nontrivial to me to make it do so as ctng includes it's own patches which may conflict with "ours". Doubling the safe/extra patches as patches-to-ctng (so patches-to-patches) also isn't really nice. Our ctng version is also still using 0.9.32. -- Bye, Peter Korsgaard