-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 I can help with a uClibc build environment - I build packages for Alpine Linux (which uses uClibc) & have recently been testing a build environment for it in LXC on Debian - a working Alpine system is 5 meg in size.
I've attached an Alpine template (from Alpine - its newer than the template in Debian Testing) - it's simple to get working in Debian with these notes: http://wiki.alpinelinux.org/wiki/LXC https://wiki.debian.org/LXC <http://wiki.alpinelinux.org/wiki/LXC> The root password is blank & networking needs to be enabled in the Alpine Guest with: /*rc-update add networking boot rc-service networking start*/ Build tools can be installed with: /*apk add alpine-sdk*/ Stuart. On 02/17/2014 08:15 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Monday, February 17, 2014 14:35:24 Christopher Meng wrote: >> 2014-2-17 PM1:42 "Mike Frysinger" <[email protected]>: >>> what is this "we" business ? lots of people use uClibc, and that isn't >>> the problem here. in fact, building 2013.62 w/uClibc works just fine for >>> me. >> >> Lots of people don't use it as well. > > i never said everyone uses it whereas you said "we don't use it". there is no > collective "we" that you can speak authoritatively for. > >> Thus many people can't help since we >> can't be in the same environment like his basically, then we are impossible >> to find the problem as the conditions are not the same. > > sorry that is bs. getting a system using uClibc instead of glibc is not hard > at all (there are released distros based on it) which means it is not > "impossible". further, it doesn't take a whole lot of deductive reasoning to > think about the problem and where the issue actually lies. > >> But never because of not tied to Linux. > > i have no idea what that means. uClibc is a C library, not a kernel. > >>> the problem is that Steve's kernel headers are broken. he didn't say what >>> version he's using, but i'm guessing ancient considering that header was >>> fixed in the 2.6.29 release to include linux/types.h correctly. >> >> Maybe, but who knows this exactly especially when we(don't you?) don't know >> about the details. > > well, my response was a lot more reasonable/useful than your dismissive one > line response > -mike -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJTAc7dAAoJEFT/IHPMDdVInwkQAKD+CG1ZtR0NxWu9fqHiVFYo Ui9FQzDlwZcoZDyjNDIgDBzeBS0p7eq+UPQ7RlJOyQam9LXBdhpkKnM6PHe05aZj ngoTr30ZOlo6fAQmS9r83iuMx5/LuyCuE6xOS/xcpJbtPrP+ldIQ0XQ34yd8pqWG F7m1sbFGy8pL99jQWFcy0e350t6wQWuroCi5gFGLAWqfBdjmshFyb8RDe7TI1pts +NC6yURnNEpgjwgyuFXzjUBDkd4nJMYxwMXnLgh2aKf/VxQZBObd2+66ujBML3ce JaC5qAYbncM0Rcwtz/BILUnHLpwwNlee7dA+EgZSQcaiF6EWSKacr3IfTK0Apc3p +JZFpIy3d7r3XoSEsuVUKTTXs/j6boPZQtfzL1X4uVr7PZJcmja/Zia/s+T6zNYU Cb2/WoWMrb01aBoIIrvV//8w3+tPdkfskuucSiRU/ILoqbEznsKJz1wg4175QMkd QI7TWxIEkD6jD4zl9903exOj7ZtlrVaF+sVXWX78wSNFZlvwj03ctsMuBwBMN16P EuAUIU2M4reGNgzRh/nKgrAXA7tOGVo6tcRYDpCQ+febJPFSMiHHyoe5QVdV3YZ1 v0rco/h2RUCLB10vWIq6fkukfeI+W0etTwrWoBgEP+nms2oQzRPZmlyH+BMv9opQ aj578/4AyAE43Pl3TzSk =e8ke -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
alpine-lxc-template.tar.gz
Description: GNU Zip compressed data
0xCC0DD548.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys
alpine-lxc-template.tar.gz.sig
Description: PGP signature
0xCC0DD548.asc.sig
Description: PGP signature
