On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 10:21 PM Gedare Bloom <ged...@rtems.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 9:01 PM Vaibhav Gupta <vaibhavgupt...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > Sounds good to me. > > > > On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 6:47 PM Joel Sherrill <j...@rtems.org> wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 2:12 AM Vaibhav Gupta <vaibhavgupt...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >>> > >>> Hello, > >>> After Joel pointed out in an offlist discussion, > >>> I made a new patch for ndbm port. > >>> . > >>> To send the changes to Newlib, i had to place `ndbm.h` , `ndbm.c` in > their respective places and make changes in Makefile.am. > >>> Before, I applied same patch to RSB hence ndbm library was not > generated. > >>> . > >> > >> In my local build yesterday, I saw the symbols in the installed libc.a. > I have not run the tests. > >> > >>> > >>> . > >>> This time I also added files generated by `autoreconf -fvi` in the > patch. > >>> . > >>> This patch is 10MB in size hence cannot be send in raw format on > mailing list. > >> > >> > >> The person committing is supposed to do the autoreconf and commit that. > >> > >> No one has answered if it is OK to commit. That was the last message in > the thread. > > > > I will ping on that thread again for confirmation. > >> > >> > >>> > >>> . > >>> This patch worked with RSB and ndbm library (lib_a-ndbm.o) was > generated > >>> successfully in RTEMS Toolchain. > >> > >> > >> I'm hoping we can avoid this by pushing the patch to newlib, then > bumping the hash for > >> newlib in the RSB, then adding your ndbm test patch to RTEMS. > > > > Yeah, meanwhile testsuite can be verified. > > . > > Also, please look at the sources I send on devel for fenv. Should I > ignore architectures > > which are not having FreeBSD source? or Should i pick from NetBSD and > FreeBSD > > both? > Pick from both, figuring out how to translate the NetBSD > implementation to work with how the FreeBSD ones are implemented, if > necessary. Mostly, they define very similar data structures, > macros/functions, etc., so I think it should be possible to unify > them. > Sure, then I will work in this direction. Also, SPARC has only NetBSD source, so I guess it can be ported directly from it. -Vaibhav Gupta > > Gedare > > >> > >> > >> --joel > >> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> Thank you > >>> Vaibhav Gupta >
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel