On 7/11/07, Rob Landley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I look forward to a fix. It would be nice to add sparc to the "actually
works" list. :)
that's 2 persons looking forward to it. ;-)
today's results:
- uclibc ok (minus the segfaults coming from it)
- conf from busybox segfaults
- bash segfaul
On 7/11/07, Rob Landley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
When you get that kind of segmentation fault, see if "hello world" segfaults
too. (In general, when building with a new toolchain, new C library, new
kernel, new root filesystem packaging method, or a new system in general, if
anything goes wron
On Wednesday 11 July 2007 9:34:17 am Christian MICHON wrote:
> I just managed a compilation of bash-3.2 using ncurses-5.6 and
> uClibc-0.9.29 inside a qemu-system-sparc (native compilation,
> no cross compilation).
>
> "ldd ./bash" points naturally to libdl.so.0, libc.so.0, ld-uClibc.so.0
>
> ./bas
On 7/11/07, Christian MICHON <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I just managed a compilation of bash-3.2 using ncurses-5.6 and
uClibc-0.9.29 inside a qemu-system-sparc (native compilation,
no cross compilation).
"ldd ./bash" points naturally to libdl.so.0, libc.so.0, ld-uClibc.so.0
./bash
Segmentation
On 7/11/07, Blue Swirl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It's entirely possibly that qemu and real sparc hardware are behaving
> differently, but I'm not seeing this bus error under qemu. (I haven't got
> real sparc hardware, so I can only debug against qemu...)
Right. Debugging the problem I found
