[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2012 23:31:19 -0500
From: Richard Pennington <rich@...nware.com>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Cc: idunham@...abit.com
Subject: Re: ELLCC and musl
On Monday, July 09, 2012 09:52:14 PM idunham@...abit.com wrote:
> > I added a blog post making my switch to musl official. :-)
> > http://ellcc.org/blog/?p=135
>
> Neat!
> I have a few questions:
>
> 1-I noticed there was something about beginning a Microblaze port. Out of
> curiousity, is this currently usable (to the point of running cat or ls),
> was it abandoned, or is it present but not yet usable?
The Microblaze port is pretty far along. Most of my library regression tests
succeed.
For executables, I compile and run (NetBSD versions) of cat, chmod, cp echo,
ed, expr, kill, ln ls, mkdir, mv, pwd, rmdir, rm, sleep, and test,
Of these the (rudimentary) tests fail for Microblaze for ed, expr. ls, and
test.
You can see outstanding bugs at http://ellcc.org/bugzilla/
>
> 2-Do you plan to submit patches for mips/ppc (and Microblaze, if you have
> it working) support soon?
> (I ask this partly because Landley says that those two would be enough for
> him to consider moving Aboriginal towards musl. Also, if it would take a
> while and you're willing, some of us could prepare some patches).
Microblaze will probably come before ppc, just because I'm still struggling
with clang/LLVM support of ppc.
>
> 3-Is SVN the only way to download source, or is there a way to get tarballs?
Right now it is just SVN. I could set up tarballs, though, if there is enough
interest.
>
> 4-Roughly what compiler would you expect to be needed to build the
> toolchain? (will GCC-3.4 g++ be enough, or would 4.2 or 4.6 be necessary?)
I have only used clang/LLVM for testing. I was testing against gcc 4.6
previously.
-Rich
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
