On Fri, Aug 02, 2024 at 05:48:13PM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> > With all these libc functionality added, it isn't nolibc looks like :)
>
> Well :-)
>
> The main motivation is to provide kselftests compatibility.
> Maybe Willy disagrees.
No no I'm perfectly fine with adding the functions th
On 8/2/24 09:48, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
On 2024-07-31 17:01:09+, Shuah Khan wrote:
On 7/31/24 12:32, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
The implementation is limited and only supports numeric arguments.
I would like to see more information in here. Why is this needed
etc. etc.
Ack.
Signed-off-
On 2024-07-31 17:01:09+, Shuah Khan wrote:
> On 7/31/24 12:32, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> > The implementation is limited and only supports numeric arguments.
>
> I would like to see more information in here. Why is this needed
> etc. etc.
Ack.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh
> > --
On 7/31/24 12:32, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
The implementation is limited and only supports numeric arguments.
I would like to see more information in here. Why is this needed
etc. etc.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh
---
tools/include/nolibc/stdio.h | 93 +++
The implementation is limited and only supports numeric arguments.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh
---
tools/include/nolibc/stdio.h | 93
tools/testing/selftests/nolibc/nolibc-test.c | 59 ++
2 files changed, 152 insertions(+)
diff --
