Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2012 20:49:50 -0700 (PDT) From: idunham@...abit.com To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: Hello > On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 07:09:25PM -0400, idunham@...abit.com wrote: >> I've been getting a little impatient waiting to see if anything happens, >> so I started going through orc's patch and revising it. > > Sorry, I've had fairly little in the way of contiguous blocks of time > to work on stuff over the past few weeks. Trying to catch up a bit... Not directed at you in particular, and I understand that. > I need to look back at the archives but it seems a lot of this patch > was about getting glibc binaries to run with musl. Can we break the > efforts to integrate it down into 3 steps: I broke it down into 10 patches, taking roughly the same approach. > 1. Linux API-level stuff musl should be supporting regardless of glibc > compatibility. See patches 1-4. These are the missing syscalls. According to what orc was saying, patch 1 was what he needed for Xorg. Gregor also said he could use it. > 2. glibc-compatibility symbols that need to be exported to get > high-demand binary blobs (like video drivers) working. > 3. Additional glibc-compatibility symbols, which may or may not be > wanted/needed/desirable in the long term, and which we can at least > defer addressing for a while. orc would know better than I, but it *seemed* that he was saying that everything in his patch fell in 1 or 2 ... >> While looking at arm, I noticed that x86/mips gas uses @function while >> arm uses %function...is there a reason for this? > > I think it's just a difference in the asm syntax rules for different > targets. They're all very inconsistent... OK, thanks. >> >> > Probably you will want to add: >> >> > - weak_aliases for __underscores >> >> Except most of them should be in the opposite direction. Especially >> >> for functions like strxfrm_l where we'll eventually want the ISO C >> >> "foo" function to depend on the POSIX "foo_l" function, the latter >> >> will need its real name to be the __-prefixed version. >> Are there any of these that should not be the other way around? > Need to review again... See patches 5-10 (except the finite() patch) I figured that any *isoc99* or __*_internal aliases were for ABI only and left them as orc had it. Everything in src/locale/ I assumed (!) was not ISO C99, and did them "in the opposite direction".
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.