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 7:17:28 am Blue Swirl wrote:
> On 7/10/07, Rob Landley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Tuesday 10 July 2007 14:30:38 Blue Swirl wrote:
> > > > The sparc platform has a problem that if I boot with init as a "hello
> > > > world" program everything behaves as expected (the
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
On 7/10/07, Rob Landley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tuesday 10 July 2007 14:30:38 Blue Swirl wrote:
> > The sparc platform has a problem that if I boot with init as a "hello
> > world" program everything behaves as expected (there are two in the image
> > for testing purposes, /tools/bin/hello-
On 7/10/07, Bernhard Fischer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wed, Jul 04, 2007 at 09:54:48PM +0200, Cedric Hombourger wrote:
>The busybox link failure has an existing entry in mantis:
>http://www.uclibc.org/bugs/bug_view_advanced_page.php?bug_id=1356
Just to expand on this one last time, here is t
On Wed, Jul 04, 2007 at 09:54:48PM +0200, Cedric Hombourger wrote:
>The busybox link failure has an existing entry in mantis:
>http://www.uclibc.org/bugs/bug_view_advanced_page.php?bug_id=1356
Just to expand on this one last time, here is the help-text of taskset:
config TASKSET
bool "task
On Tuesday 10 July 2007 14:30:38 Blue Swirl wrote:
> > The sparc platform has a problem that if I boot with init as a "hello
> > world" program everything behaves as expected (there are two in the image
> > for testing purposes, /tools/bin/hello-dynamic and
> > /tools/bin/hello-static). But if you
The sparc platform has a problem that if I boot with init as a "hello world"
program everything behaves as expected (there are two in the image for
testing purposes, /tools/bin/hello-dynamic and /tools/bin/hello-static). But
if you boot with init=/tools/bin/bash it hangs. And so do the busybox
s
On Saturday 30 June 2007 13:15:44 Blue Swirl wrote:
> On 6/30/07, Thiemo Seufer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > On Sat, 30 Jun 2007, Blue Swirl wrote:
> > > > On 6/30/07, Christian MICHON <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > > DetaolB aimed to be a "muc
On Wednesday 04 July 2007 16:32:44 Christian MICHON wrote:
> On 7/4/07, Andreas Färber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Is there a special reason to use Aurora? I thought it was an
> > abandoned port of Fedora Core 2... (with Fedora 7 available nowadays)
> > Debian was the only maintained Sparc distr
On 7/5/07, Rob Landley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
What's the difference between deltaolb and Firmware Linux, anyway? I'm still
curious about this.
a few differences, quite minor actually (that's why I said in the past we
shared many common goals :-) )...
I actually started this in 2002, but t
On Wednesday 04 July 2007 16:11:19 Christian MICHON wrote:
> On 7/4/07, Cedric Hombourger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > You may want to look at crosskit.sourceforge.net
>
> thanks for this hint.
>
> > I haven't looked at detaoib yet but it was surely created before crosskit
> > and may therefore b
ok,
I found this file (google for it): stage3-sparc-2006.0.tar.bz2
I put it into a vmdk image file, preformatted in ext2 fs.
I touched up a few files and used the sparc kernel and
binaries from the qemu-windows page.
I've now a native compiler for sparc32. I managed some
stuff with it already.
On 7/4/07, Blue Swirl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> what command line did you use when you reported a
> successful installation of aurora earlier this year ?
qemu-system-sparc -boot d -hda aurora-1.0.img -cdrom aurora-1.0-sparc-disc1.iso
I tested Aurora 1.0 and 2.0, 2.1 can't read from cdrom. I
On 7/4/07, Christian MICHON <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 7/4/07, Blue Swirl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Aurora is fine, Debian should work on Sparc too.
when trying to boot aurora, it stops and complains about
/dev/sda
I already gave a hda disk. is it a problem of size or a
problem of command
On 7/4/07, Andreas Färber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Is there a special reason to use Aurora? I thought it was an
abandoned port of Fedora Core 2... (with Fedora 7 available nowadays)
Debian was the only maintained Sparc distribution I could recently
find for qemu.
that's the only port I found
On 7/4/07, Blue Swirl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Aurora is fine, Debian should work on Sparc too.
when trying to boot aurora, it stops and complains about
/dev/sda
I already gave a hda disk. is it a problem of size or a
problem of command line switch ?
what command line did you use when you r
Am 04.07.2007 um 21:45 schrieb Christian MICHON:
I plan to build uclibc and the rest natively from aurora
linux 2.99
Is there a special reason to use Aurora? I thought it was an
abandoned port of Fedora Core 2... (with Fedora 7 available nowadays)
Debian was the only maintained Sparc distri
On 7/4/07, Christian MICHON <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I noticed spurious fast keyboard repeats. Like I must be
extra careful when typing commands when in the
qemu-system-sparc guest.
I thought that was fixed some time ago, but I'll check.
I plan to build uclibc and the rest natively from aur
On 7/4/07, Cedric Hombourger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
You may want to look at crosskit.sourceforge.net
thanks for this hint.
I haven't looked at detaoib yet but it was surely created before crosskit
and may therefore be a safer bet.
DetaolB aims to be a native solution, not a cross compi
The busybox link failure has an existing entry in mantis:
http://www.uclibc.org/bugs/bug_view_advanced_page.php?bug_id=1356
2007/7/4, Cedric Hombourger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Hi,
You may want to look at crosskit.sourceforge.net (a
crosstool/buildroot-like project that I have recently started an
Hi,
You may want to look at crosskit.sourceforge.net (a crosstool/buildroot-like
project that I have recently started and that you can find on sourceforge).
Following your e-mails, I have added sparc support. The toolchain builds
fine but busybox fails to link (sched_getaffinity and sched_setaffi
On 7/4/07, Blue Swirl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I used the attached config for sparc-test kernel build, with one patch
for TCX that shouldn't be necessary for newer kernels.
thanks. that'll save time.
> will uclibc work well enough on sparc32 ?
I have no first hand experience. Busybox work
On 7/4/07, Christian MICHON <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 6/30/07, Blue Swirl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As the number of Sparc32 distributions keeps approaching zero, could
> you consider porting DetaolB to non-x86 CPUs?
ok, I documented myself, and I'll try on sparc32.
any hint on patches, c
On 6/30/07, Blue Swirl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
As the number of Sparc32 distributions keeps approaching zero, could
you consider porting DetaolB to non-x86 CPUs?
ok, I documented myself, and I'll try on sparc32.
any hint on patches, config files for the kernel ?
will uclibc work well enough
On 6/30/07, Thiemo Seufer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, 30 Jun 2007, Blue Swirl wrote:
>
> > On 6/30/07, Christian MICHON <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > DetaolB aimed to be a "much-less-than-a-floppy" x86 linux live distro.
> > > Now, it's evolving more
On 6/30/07, Johannes Schindelin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
On Sat, 30 Jun 2007, Blue Swirl wrote:
> On 6/30/07, Christian MICHON <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > DetaolB aimed to be a "much-less-than-a-floppy" x86 linux live distro.
> > Now, it's evolving more into "a-la-slax" type of distro.
On 6/30/07, Thiemo Seufer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The reason why distributions drop sparc32 is the unmaintained kernel.
Nobody stepped up for Linux kernel maintenance in the last years.
Debian managed to keep up a sort-of working kernel for the last
release, the people who put their time into
Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, 30 Jun 2007, Blue Swirl wrote:
>
> > On 6/30/07, Christian MICHON <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > DetaolB aimed to be a "much-less-than-a-floppy" x86 linux live distro.
> > > Now, it's evolving more into "a-la-slax" type of distro.
> >
> > As the nu
Hi,
On Sat, 30 Jun 2007, Blue Swirl wrote:
> On 6/30/07, Christian MICHON <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > DetaolB aimed to be a "much-less-than-a-floppy" x86 linux live distro.
> > Now, it's evolving more into "a-la-slax" type of distro.
>
> As the number of Sparc32 distributions keeps approachi
On 6/30/07, Christian MICHON <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
DetaolB aimed to be a "much-less-than-a-floppy" x86 linux live distro.
Now, it's evolving more into "a-la-slax" type of distro.
As the number of Sparc32 distributions keeps approaching zero, could
you consider porting DetaolB to non-x86 CP
DetaolB aimed to be a "much-less-than-a-floppy" x86 linux live distro.
Now, it's evolving more into "a-la-slax" type of distro.
DetaolB v0.4 has been released 29th,June 2007 on sf.net
=>
http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=140321&package_id=155481&release_id=519786
Mailing lis
35 matches
Mail list logo
