From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Romain Naour Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2021 18:42:22 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH 2/2] package/{glibc, localedef}: bump to version 2.33-37-g162df872f0dfc2b124a18e1a8c33be63f70d9a1c In-Reply-To: <2BECD4AC-08A6-47CF-BA24-ED362C358095@c-sky.com> References: <20210426101021.2418145-1-romain.naour@gmail.com> <20210426101021.2418145-2-romain.naour@gmail.com> <20210426194329.GL298901@scaer> <6372bec9-db43-6dbf-4b93-706b399bd072@gmail.com> <2BECD4AC-08A6-47CF-BA24-ED362C358095@c-sky.com> Message-ID: <8ecf3857-d9de-86c8-3d76-b55d0a8343f8@gmail.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Hello Guo, Han, Le 28/04/2021 ? 16:33, Guo Ren a ?crit?: > > > Best Regards > Guo Ren > > > >> ? 2021?4?27????4:05?Romain Naour ??? >> >> Hello Arnout, >> >> Le 27/04/2021 ? 09:25, Arnout Vandecappelle a ?crit : >>> >>> >>> On 26/04/2021 21:43, Yann E. MORIN wrote: >>>> Arnout, Romain, All, >>>> >>>> On 2021-04-26 21:36 +0200, Arnout Vandecappelle spake thusly: >>>>> On 26/04/2021 12:10, Romain Naour wrote: >>>>> [snip] >>>>>> rename package/glibc/{2.32-37-g760e1d287825fa91d4d5a0cc921340c740d803e2 => 2.33-37-g162df872f0dfc2b124a18e1a8c33be63f70d9a1c}/glibc.hash (70%) >>>>>> rename package/localedef/{2.32-37-g760e1d287825fa91d4d5a0cc921340c740d803e2 => 2.33-37-g162df872f0dfc2b124a18e1a8c33be63f70d9a1c}/0001-HACK-only-build-and-install-localedef.patch (100%) >>>>>> rename package/localedef/{2.32-37-g760e1d287825fa91d4d5a0cc921340c740d803e2 => 2.33-37-g162df872f0dfc2b124a18e1a8c33be63f70d9a1c}/0002-relax-dependency-on-GCC-to-4.8-and-binutils-to-2.24.patch (100%) >>>>>> rename package/localedef/{2.32-37-g760e1d287825fa91d4d5a0cc921340c740d803e2 => 2.33-37-g162df872f0dfc2b124a18e1a8c33be63f70d9a1c}/localedef.hash (70%) >>>>> >>>>> Now you're messing with these packages, maybe you can take the opportunity to >>>>> get rid of the versioned subdirectory. That's a leftover from when we had >>>>> version selection for glibc. >>>> >>>> We stil have a version choice for glibc; it's just not exposed to the >>>> user: indeed we use different version for csky, riscv32, and the rest. >>>> >>>> So, we still do not want to apply the "generic" patches to the csky >>>> fork, or to the riscv32 version... >>> >>> Ah, I missed the csky fork... The riscv32 one should be gone, so I thought that >>> was it. >> >> The csky for is based on glibc 2.28 but csky was added to glibc 2.29 >> >> https://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=commit;h=5f72b00591ce4d1b4c0418294ffe1623983d5679 >> >> Maybe we can use upstream glibc? > Cc glibc csky maintainer: Mao Han Same for binutils. We are using an old fork of binutils 2.27 for csky but we can use binutils 2.32 to 2.36. Please, help us to use upstream version. > >> But we can't test with our Qemu version since csky is not yet upstream, we can >> retrieve the csky qemu fork we had last year. >> > C-SKY qemu test: > https://gitlab.com/c-sky/buildroot/-/jobs/1190489794 > > You can get qemu: > https://gitlab.com/c-sky/buildroot/-/blob/master/package/qemu-enhanced/qemu-enhanced.mk This is a prebuilt qemu binary I can use locally but it would be great if qemu for csky could be built from sources. Do you know if there is some news about csky contribution to Qemu ? Best regards, Romain