On Sunday, 3 May 2015, at 6:54 pm, Denys Vlasenko wrote: > On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 11:33 PM, Matt Whitlock > <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Saturday, 25 April 2015, at 7:17 pm, Denys Vlasenko wrote: > >> Let me know how I can test this on a x86 machine. > > > > Bionic doesn't really support vanilla Linux. > > Do you really build your busybox on your phone? > > I guess you have a cross-compiler or something.
Oh, sorry for the misunderstanding. I thought you wanted to test on an x86 machine. Yes, I do build BusyBox on x86_64. I use the Android NDK cross-compiler. > Where can I get it to do my own builds? https://developer.android.com/tools/sdk/ndk/index.html See the documentation for the make-standalone-toolchain.sh script. I invoked it as follows to set up the toolchain that I use for building BusyBox: # ./make-standalone-toolchain.sh --ndk-dir=/opt/android-ndk --system=linux-x86_64 --arch=arm --platform=android-15 --install-dir=/usr/local/arm-linux-androideabi > As to the patch, I can take it. Can you add a comment on top > of the added code which version of Bionic it was tested with, > what are the quirks (e.g. "struct stat having 64-bit st_ino > and st_size" are quirks, normal C libc don't do that...). I'm going to write some test cases to exercise all of the migrated types (off_t, ino_t, blkcnt_t, fsblkcnt_t, fsfilcnt_t) on ARM Android, and I will test building against various versions of Bionic and executing on KitKat and Lollipop. I'll get back to you with my findings. _______________________________________________ busybox mailing list [email protected] http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
