Anyone volunteering to create an mkfile for bionic, this jam looks like jam and should be avoided. I volunteer to review it and to bring it in good shape.
-Anselm On 13 October 2010 14:34, Jens Staal <staal1...@gmail.com> wrote: > I have no idea what the jam stuff is but I found this after some googling too > > https://www.metasploit.com/redmine/projects/framework/repository/revisions/10202/entry/external/source/meterpreter/source/bionic/libc/Jamfile > > 2010/10/13 Corey Thomasson <cthom.li...@gmail.com>: >> Excellent! I've been searching for something like this. I'll check it out. >> >> On 13 October 2010 08:29, Jens Staal <staal1...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Are those issues already solved by >>> >>> http://www.metasploit.com/redmine/attachments/433/get_bionic_working.diff >>> >>> ? >>> >>> 2010/10/13 Corey Thomasson <cthom.li...@gmail.com>: >>>> On 12 October 2010 20:58, Wolf Tivy <wti...@my.bcit.ca> wrote: >>>>>>I've managed to make it compile a good chunk of the object files, >>>>>>but not malloc/free so its somewhat wasted. >>>>> >>>>> It'll talk eventually, keep up the pressure. >>>>> >>>>>> When I get a chance to go at it again I believe the android distribution >>>>>>has some "clean" kernel headers included. I may try to move those to >>>>>>wherever its looking now. >>>>> >>>>> Yes it does, in fact I think it shouldn't need any system headers at all, >>>>> if you point it to the paths in OVERVIEW.TXT. Is there some >>>>> "include_path" environment variable you can set, or do we have to hack >>>>> the jamfile? Or we could do it your way and move them. Worst case is a new >>>>> makefile. >>>> >>>> there's a variable in the Jamfile INCLUDES_x86, the included header >>>> files dont seem to do the trick though. Running into syntax errors. >>>> >>>>> Surely someone else must have dealt with this. Metasploit has been >>>>> mentioned >>>>> a few times, but I couldn't find any thing more than the blog post >>>>> (issue report, whatever) that jens linked. Anyone have a link to more >>>>> info? >>>>> >>>>> About uClibc, it's LGPL, so isn't static linking a bit marginal? For >>>>> GPL-compatible stuff it's ok, but 9base is incompatible, so it may >>>>> actually >>>>> need to be ported to bionic. Have I got this right? >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > >
