Re: [PATCH] tools/gnu: Enable LTO in RSB tools

On Wed, Jun 15, 2022 at 5:29 PM Chris Johns wrote: > On 15/6/2022 10:58 pm, Joel Sherrill wrote: > > What's the problem with enabling LTO support in the tools by default? > > None that I know of and this patch enables the support by default. The RSB > incorrectly suppo

Re: [PATCH] tools/gnu: Enable LTO in RSB tools

On 15/6/2022 10:58 pm, Joel Sherrill wrote: > What's the problem with enabling LTO support in the tools by default? None that I know of and this patch enables the support by default. The RSB incorrectly supported the configure `--enable-lto` option. That option controls the host build and w

Re: [PATCH] tools/gnu: Enable LTO in RSB tools

What's the problem with enabling LTO support in the tools by default? Using it is a different matter. --joel On Wed, Jun 15, 2022, 7:20 AM wrote: > From: Chris Johns > > --- > source-builder/config/binutils-2-1.cfg | 6 +- > source-builder/config/gcc-common-1.cfg | 10 +++--- > 2

[PATCH] tools/gnu: Enable LTO in RSB tools

From: Chris Johns --- source-builder/config/binutils-2-1.cfg | 6 +- source-builder/config/gcc-common-1.cfg | 10 +++--- 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) diff --git a/source-builder/config/binutils-2-1.cfg b/source-builder/config/binutils-2-1.cfg index

RSB -- github has removed git protocol support

Hi github has disabled the git protocol and wants people to use the https or ssh protocol. There are a handful of github git:// URLs in the RSB master and possibly more in the 5 branch. I have no idea right now what the rule is to convert the URLs from git to https ones. This is a warning

Re: [PATCH] RSB: Remove option --with-java

OK. Thanks Chris On 7/5/2022 1:20 am, Frank Kuehndel wrote: > From: Frank Kühndel > > The sb-set-builder options --with-java / --without-java do not work. > GCC configure does not known language "java". See > https://gcc.gnu.org/install/configure.html option --enable-languages. > > update

[PATCH] RSB: Remove option --with-java

From: Frank Kühndel The sb-set-builder options --with-java / --without-java do not work. GCC configure does not known language "java". See https://gcc.gnu.org/install/configure.html option --enable-languages. update #4647 --- source-builder/config/checks.cfg | 9 -

Re: [RSB 1/2] gcc: Move GMP, MPC, MPFR sources to common

On 22/4/2022 4:47 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote: > Use GCC infrastructure download directory for GCC prerequisites. Nice change. OK to push. Thanks Chris ___ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

[RSB 1/2] gcc: Move GMP, MPC, MPFR sources to common

- %patch add gcc --rsb-file=Make-lang.in-b09fb02bb4c0d16fc2c842bec4069c033897b5f2.patch -p1 https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=blobdiff_plain;f=gcc/cp/Make-lang.in;h=b09fb02bb4c0d16fc2c842bec4069c033897b5f2;hp=e98beb1e33e4bcc4943361c559ae71b7eb345346;hb=1e5f1089dec3af328fd03125d6778f666d0bd4e4

[RSB 2/2] 6/7: Update GCC prerequisites for GCC 10 and 12

--- .../config/tools/rtems-gcc-10-newlib-head.cfg | 2 +- .../tools/rtems-gcc-head-newlib-head.cfg | 2 +- source-builder/config/gcc-10.cfg | 20 +++ source-builder/config/gcc-12.cfg | 20 +++ 4 files changed, 42 insertions(+), 2

Re: RSB Issue with lexicographic comparison of python versions (shown on Ubuntu 22.04 LTS/python 3.10 platform).

On 20/4/2022 11:32 pm, Karel Gardas wrote: > On 4/20/22 10:12, Karel Gardas wrote: >>> The number 3.8 is less than 3.10 so if we changed things so it was a numeric >>> check it would still fail. >> >> No, it would not fail, since then > > Chris, > > sorry about that email which obviously was

Re: RSB Issue with lexicographic comparison of python versions (shown on Ubuntu 22.04 LTS/python 3.10 platform).

On 4/20/22 10:12, Karel Gardas wrote: The number 3.8 is less than 3.10 so if we changed things so it was a numeric check it would still fail. No, it would not fail, since then Chris, sorry about that email which obviously was result of not enough morning caffeine on my side. Will see if

Re: RSB Issue with lexicographic comparison of python versions (shown on Ubuntu 22.04 LTS/python 3.10 platform).

Hello, just as note, I have already opened a ticked for this issue: https://devel.rtems.org/ticket/4631 Greetings fk On 4/19/22 12:06, Karel Gardas wrote: > testing RSB on soon to be release Ubuntu 22.04 LTS. This distro provides > python 3.10 and interestingly gdb compilation fails

Re: RSB Issue with lexicographic comparison of python versions (shown on Ubuntu 22.04 LTS/python 3.10 platform).

On 4/20/22 01:03, Chris Johns wrote: On 19/4/2022 8:06 pm, Karel Gardas wrote:   Chris, testing RSB on soon to be release Ubuntu 22.04 LTS. This distro provides python 3.10 and interestingly gdb compilation fails badly on it with: making dir: /home/karel/workspace/rtems-source-builder/rtems

Re: RSB Issue with lexicographic comparison of python versions (shown on Ubuntu 22.04 LTS/python 3.10 platform).

On 19/4/2022 8:06 pm, Karel Gardas wrote: > >   Chris, > > testing RSB on soon to be release Ubuntu 22.04 LTS. This distro provides > python > 3.10 and interestingly gdb compilation fails badly on it with: > > making dir: > /home/karel/workspace/rtems-source-builde

RSB Issue with lexicographic comparison of python versions (shown on Ubuntu 22.04 LTS/python 3.10 platform).

Chris, testing RSB on soon to be release Ubuntu 22.04 LTS. This distro provides python 3.10 and interestingly gdb compilation fails badly on it with: making dir: /home/karel/workspace/rtems-source-builder/rtems/build/tmp/gmp-6.1.0-x86_64-linux-gnu-1-1000/home/karel/workspace/rtems-tools

Re: [PATCH] fix _mkdir parameter error.[RSB]

On 2/4/2022 12:20 am, Joel Sherrill wrote: > Chris should comment on this technically. The patch is for covoar and not the RSB. I am a little confused? > My concern is that the < and > in this patch were converted to HTML.  > I do not believe this will apply. I think your email c

Re: [PATCH] fix _mkdir parameter error.[RSB]

Chris should comment on this technically. My concern is that the < and > in this patch were converted to HTML. I do not believe this will apply. I think your email client converted it from ASCII to HTML. On Fri, Apr 1, 2022 at 4:25 AM zhengxiaojun wrote: > It is a RSB pacth. > gi

Re:[PATCH] fix _mkdir parameter error.[RSB]

It is a RSB pacth. git send-eamil has no information about it. --Original-- From: "zhengxi

Re: [PATCH RSB] microblaze: Add GCC patch to define __ELF__

This patch also needs to go upstream to GCC? Has the one for the init symbol been submitted to GCC? On Thu, Feb 3, 2022, 12:56 PM Alex White wrote: > This fixes compilation errors in rtems-libbsd. > --- > rtems/config/tools/rtems-xilinx-gcc-10-newlib-head.cfg | 3 +++ > 1 file changed, 3

[PATCH RSB] microblaze: Add GCC patch to define __ELF__

This fixes compilation errors in rtems-libbsd. --- rtems/config/tools/rtems-xilinx-gcc-10-newlib-head.cfg | 3 +++ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) diff --git a/rtems/config/tools/rtems-xilinx-gcc-10-newlib-head.cfg b/rtems/config/tools/rtems-xilinx-gcc-10-newlib-head.cfg index a83fe46..5366457

[RSB 5 PATCH v2] tools/rtems-tools-5-1: Bump hash

Bump up the hash so that the recent mailer changes can be used. --- rtems/config/tools/rtems-tools-5-1.cfg | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/rtems/config/tools/rtems-tools-5-1.cfg b/rtems/config/tools/rtems-tools-5-1.cfg index 5fb3346..3be7a29 100644 ---

Re: [RSB 5 PATCH v1] tools/rtems-tools-5-1: Bump hash

Just realized I used the wrong commit. Going to fix that and send V2. On 1/5/2022 4:16 PM, Ryan Long wrote: Bump up the hash so that the recent mailer changes can be used. --- rtems/config/tools/rtems-tools-5-1.cfg | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git

[RSB 5 PATCH v1] tools/rtems-tools-5-1: Bump hash

Bump up the hash so that the recent mailer changes can be used. --- rtems/config/tools/rtems-tools-5-1.cfg | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/rtems/config/tools/rtems-tools-5-1.cfg b/rtems/config/tools/rtems-tools-5-1.cfg index 5fb3346..4290c32 100644 ---

Re: Alternative download paths for RSB?

On 22/12/21 6:37 am, Joel Sherrill wrote: > On Tue, Dec 21, 2021, 12:45 PM Chris Johns <mailto:chr...@rtems.org>> wrote: > > How can we ensure that all mirrors listed work? > > They would need to be tested and that means more code in the RSB to do it. > &

Re: Alternative download paths for RSB?

gt;>>>> > >>>>>> it seems the GNU web server is down: > >>>>> > >>>>> Yep. Still down. > >>>>> > >>>>> i reached out to the sourceware admins to see if they knew who to > >>>>>

Re: Alternative download paths for RSB?

> Yep. Still down. >>>>> >>>>> i reached out to the sourceware admins to see if they knew who to >>>>> contact. I couldn't find a gnu.org address. >>>> >>>> Social media post from FSF forwarded by one of the sourceware admins >&

Re: Alternative download paths for RSB?

o see if they knew who to > >>> contact. I couldn't find a gnu.org address. > >> > >> Social media post from FSF forwarded by one of the sourceware admins > >> about a general outage at the FSF: > >> https://hostux.social/@fsfstatus/10747947619

Re: Alternative download paths for RSB?

admins to see if they knew who to contact. I couldn't find a gnu.org address. Social media post from FSF forwarded by one of the sourceware admins about a general outage at the FSF: https://hostux.social/@fsfstatus/107479476196064925 Looks to be up now. RSB handling mirrors would be good. Although

Re: Alternative download paths for RSB?

Yep. Still down. >> >> i reached out to the sourceware admins to see if they knew who to >> contact. I couldn't find a gnu.org address. > > Social media post from FSF forwarded by one of the sourceware admins > about a general outage at the FSF: > https://host

Re: Alternative download paths for RSB?

f they knew who to > contact. I couldn't find a gnu.org address. Social media post from FSF forwarded by one of the sourceware admins about a general outage at the FSF: https://hostux.social/@fsfstatus/107479476196064925 Looks to be up now. RSB handling mirrors would be good. Although it wou

Re: Alternative download paths for RSB?

On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 6:59 AM Sebastian Huber wrote: > > Hello, > > it seems the GNU web server is down: Yep. Still down. i reached out to the sourceware admins to see if they knew who to contact. I couldn't find a gnu.org address. > > download:

Alternative download paths for RSB?

Hello, it seems the GNU web server is down: download: https://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/mpfr/mpfr-3.1.4.tar.bz2 -> sources/mpfr-3.1.4.tar.bz2 download: https://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/mpfr/mpfr-3.1.4.tar.bz2: error: error: downloading https://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/mpfr/mpfr-3.1.4.tar.bz2: all paths have failed,

Re: [PATCH RSB 5] sb: Merge mailer changes from rtems-tools

OK Thanks Chris On 16/12/21 8:38 am, Alex White wrote: > This adds the improved mailer.py script from rtems-tools. > > Closes #4554 > --- > source-builder/sb/mailer.py | 194 > +--- > source-builder/sb/options.py| 26 +- >

[PATCH RSB 5] sb: Merge mailer changes from rtems-tools

This adds the improved mailer.py script from rtems-tools. Closes #4554 --- source-builder/sb/mailer.py | 194 +--- source-builder/sb/options.py| 26 +- source-builder/sb/setbuilder.py | 2 + 3 files changed, 189 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-)

Re: RSB Failure

It looks like there weren't any issues. The return code was 0. On 11/30/2021 2:47 PM, Karel Gardas wrote: On 11/30/21 5:07 PM, Ryan Long wrote: I forgot to mention that I'm using Ubuntu21.04. It has the ca-certificates package installed. Is there maybe another package that it might need? This

Re: RSB Failure

On 11/30/21 5:07 PM, Ryan Long wrote: > I forgot to mention that I'm using Ubuntu21.04. It has the > ca-certificates package installed. Is there maybe another package that > it might need? This worked fine when I did a run with RTEMS 6. What does: openssl s_client -connect git.rtems.org:443 run

Re: RSB Failure

ems.org/rtems-tools/snapshot/rtems-tools-0a5d2057749066e7d184836e92c7ce5334fccc90.tar.bz2: all paths have failed, giving up "rsb-report-rtems-tools-0a5d2057749066e7d184836e92c7ce5334fccc90-1.txt" [noeol] 407L, 32689B Yesterday, it was failing to pull in some patches from a ticket because

Re: RSB Failure

git.rtems.org/rtems-tools/snapshot/rtems-tools-0a5d2057749066e7d184836e92c7ce5... log>: error: > error: downloading > https://git.rtems.org/rtems-tools/snapshot/rtems-tools-0a5d2057749066e7d184836e92c7ce5334fccc90.tar.bz2: > all paths have failed, giving up > "rsb-re

RSB Failure

ading https://git.rtems.org/rtems-tools/snapshot/rtems-tools-0a5d2057749066e7d184836e92c7ce5334fccc90.tar.bz2: all paths have failed, giving up "rsb-report-rtems-tools-0a5d2057749066e7d184836e92c7ce5334fccc90-1.txt" [noeol] 407L, 32689B Yesterday, it was failing to pull in some

[PATCH] RSB: fix hash setup for binutils 2.37

--- rtems/config/tools/rtems-binutils-2.37.cfg | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/rtems/config/tools/rtems-binutils-2.37.cfg b/rtems/config/tools/rtems-binutils-2.37.cfg index dbdc38c..8cbe738 100644 --- a/rtems/config/tools/rtems-binutils-2.37.cfg +++

Re: [PATCH] RSB: add GRUB2 to the RTEMS tools and use it in 6/rtems-x86_64 build set

This patch is tested on Ubuntu 20.04, FreeBSD 13 and Mac OS X Catalina. It is not tested on Windows due to IMHO current documentation for Windows host to be either out-dated or not correct and I'm not able to follow it to even build RSB without the patch. Yes, on FreeBSD 13 the patch is tested

[PATCH] RSB: add GRUB2 to the RTEMS tools and use it in 6/rtems-x86_64 build set

--- rtems/config/6/rtems-x86_64.bset | 5 ++ rtems/config/tools/rtems-grub-2.06.cfg | 8 +++ source-builder/config/grub2.cfg| 75 ++ 3 files changed, 88 insertions(+) create mode 100644 rtems/config/tools/rtems-grub-2.06.cfg create mode 100644

[PATCH] RSB: update dtc 1.6.0 -> dtc 1.6.1

Fixes #4221 Note: the patch updates only dtc 1.6.0 occurrences. It leaves all other dtc (1.4.x) usages as they are just to not break anything which depends on older dtc versions. --- bare/config/devel/dtc-1.6.1-1.cfg | 18 ++ bare/config/devel/qemu-couverture.bset | 2 +-

Re: [PATCH RSB] rtems-tools-6.cfg: Bump hash to get fix for rtems-test

OK On 13/11/21 1:54 am, Joel Sherrill wrote: > --- > rtems/config/tools/rtems-tools-6.cfg | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/rtems/config/tools/rtems-tools-6.cfg > b/rtems/config/tools/rtems-tools-6.cfg > index 6d05d12..cf895d6 100644 > ---

[PATCH RSB] rtems-tools-6.cfg: Bump hash to get fix for rtems-test

--- rtems/config/tools/rtems-tools-6.cfg | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/rtems/config/tools/rtems-tools-6.cfg b/rtems/config/tools/rtems-tools-6.cfg index 6d05d12..cf895d6 100644 --- a/rtems/config/tools/rtems-tools-6.cfg +++

Re: RSB: add GRUB2 to the tools.

On 11/11/21 9:15 am, Karel Gardas wrote: > On 11/10/21 11:04 PM, Chris Johns wrote: >> On 11/11/21 5:32 am, Karel Gardas wrote: >>> the attach patch adds GRUB2 into the RSB RTEMS tools. Idea is to use >>> that on amd64 BSP for building bootable images. That's also th

Re: RSB: add GRUB2 to the tools.

On 11/10/21 11:04 PM, Chris Johns wrote: > On 11/11/21 5:32 am, Karel Gardas wrote: >> the attach patch adds GRUB2 into the RSB RTEMS tools. Idea is to use >> that on amd64 BSP for building bootable images. That's also the reason >> why it is used only on 6/rtems-x86_64 bset

Re: RSB: add GRUB2 to the tools.

On 11/11/21 5:32 am, Karel Gardas wrote: > the attach patch adds GRUB2 into the RSB RTEMS tools. Idea is to use > that on amd64 BSP for building bootable images. That's also the reason > why it is used only on 6/rtems-x86_64 bset only. Thank you for adding this and posting it here.

Re: RSB: add GRUB2 to the tools.

Looks like attachments are not supported? Hence including patch inline. >From f66de270bba2ec3496bf3e8504bb4d1e60c52f4c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Karel Gardas Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2021 19:27:22 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] add GRUB2 to the RSB RTEMS tools and use it in 6/rtems-x86_64 build

RSB: add GRUB2 to the tools.

Hi, the attach patch adds GRUB2 into the RSB RTEMS tools. Idea is to use that on amd64 BSP for building bootable images. That's also the reason why it is used only on 6/rtems-x86_64 bset only. Thanks, Karel ___ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org

Re: [PATCH RSB v3] rtems-kernel: Implement kernel recipe using waf

OK and thanks Chris On 5/11/21 1:31 am, Ryan Long wrote: > Closes #4145 > --- > rtems/config/tools/rtems-kernel-6.cfg | 6 +- > rtems/config/tools/rtems-kernel-common.cfg | 125 +++ > source-builder/sb/rtems-kernel-config-check | 147 >

[RSB v1 2/2] config/[67]/rtems-*.bset: Move dtc to default set

--- rtems/config/6/rtems-default.bset| 2 ++ rtems/config/6/rtems-microblaze.bset | 2 -- rtems/config/6/rtems-moxie.bset | 1 - rtems/config/7/rtems-default.bset| 2 ++ rtems/config/7/rtems-moxie.bset | 1 - 5 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git

[RSB v1 1/2] rtems-tools-6.cfg: Bump rtems-tools hash

--- rtems/config/tools/rtems-tools-6.cfg | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/rtems/config/tools/rtems-tools-6.cfg b/rtems/config/tools/rtems-tools-6.cfg index 4158753..6d05d12 100644 --- a/rtems/config/tools/rtems-tools-6.cfg +++

[RSB v1 0/2] Update rtems-tools and move dtc to base set

Hi I'm putting these out for review while the tools are still building. If anyone sees an issue with these, I am sure you will comment. :) Otherwise, I am likely to push these Tuesday. --joel Joel Sherrill (2): rtems-tools-6.cfg: Bump rtems-tools hash config/[67]/rtems-*.bset: Move dtc to

[PATCH RSB v3] rtems-kernel: Implement kernel recipe using waf

Closes #4145 --- rtems/config/tools/rtems-kernel-6.cfg | 6 +- rtems/config/tools/rtems-kernel-common.cfg | 125 +++ source-builder/sb/rtems-kernel-config-check | 147 3 files changed, 215 insertions(+), 63 deletions(-) create mode 100755

Re: [PATCH RSB v2] rtems-kernel: Implement kernel recipe using waf

On 4/11/21 12:37 am, Ryan Long wrote: > -Original Message- > From: Chris Johns > Sent: Tuesday, November 2, 2021 5:14 PM > To: Ryan Long ; devel@rtems.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH RSB v2] rtems-kernel: Implement kernel recipe using waf > > On 3/11/21 4:1

RE: [PATCH RSB v2] rtems-kernel: Implement kernel recipe using waf

-Original Message- From: Chris Johns Sent: Tuesday, November 2, 2021 5:14 PM To: Ryan Long ; devel@rtems.org Subject: Re: [PATCH RSB v2] rtems-kernel: Implement kernel recipe using waf On 3/11/21 4:13 am, Ryan Long wrote: > > -Original Message- > From: Chris John

Re: [PATCH RSB v2] rtems-kernel: Implement kernel recipe using waf

On 3/11/21 4:13 am, Ryan Long wrote: > > -Original Message- > From: Chris Johns > Sent: Monday, November 1, 2021 8:48 PM > To: Ryan Long ; devel@rtems.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH RSB v2] rtems-kernel: Implement kernel recipe using waf > On 28/10/21 2:09 am, Ryan Lon

RE: [PATCH RSB v2] rtems-kernel: Implement kernel recipe using waf

-Original Message- From: Chris Johns Sent: Monday, November 1, 2021 8:48 PM To: Ryan Long ; devel@rtems.org Subject: Re: [PATCH RSB v2] rtems-kernel: Implement kernel recipe using waf On 28/10/21 2:09 am, Ryan Long wrote: > Closes #4145 > --- > rtems/config/tools/rtems-ker

Re: [PATCH RSB v2] rtems-kernel: Implement kernel recipe using waf

%define _target %(%{_topdir}/../source-builder/rtems-kernel-config-check -v > %{rtems_version} -t %{with_rtems_bsp_config}) There is a variable called `_sbdir` that is normally used to find internal helper scripts located in the source builder... https://docs.rtems.org/branches/master/user/rsb/conf

RE: [PATCH RSB v2] rtems-kernel: Implement kernel recipe using waf

ping -Original Message- From: Ryan Long Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2021 10:09 AM To: devel@rtems.org Cc: Ryan Long Subject: [PATCH RSB v2] rtems-kernel: Implement kernel recipe using waf Closes #4145 --- rtems/config/tools/rtems-kernel-6.cfg | 6 +- rtems/config/tools/rtems

Re: [PATCH RSB] Update to dtc 1.6.1

On Fri, 29 Oct 2021 at 01:37, Joel Sherrill wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 28, 2021, 6:25 PM Chris Johns wrote: > > > On 29/10/21 6:26 am, Joel Sherrill wrote: > > > On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 12:20 PM Hesham Almatary > > > wrote: > > >> > > >> Does RISC-V need that too? > > > > > > Not based on the

Re: [PATCH RSB] Update to dtc 1.6.1

On Thu, Oct 28, 2021, 6:25 PM Chris Johns wrote: > On 29/10/21 6:26 am, Joel Sherrill wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 12:20 PM Hesham Almatary > > wrote: > >> > >> Does RISC-V need that too? > > > > Not based on the current bsets. > > > > $ grep -r dtc * > >

Re: [PATCH RSB] Update to dtc 1.6.1

On 29/10/21 6:26 am, Joel Sherrill wrote: > On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 12:20 PM Hesham Almatary > wrote: >> >> Does RISC-V need that too? > > Not based on the current bsets. > > $ grep -r dtc * > 6/rtems-moxie.bset:devel/dtc-1.6.0-1 > 6/rtems-microblaze.bset:devel/dtc-1.6.0-1 >

Re: [PATCH RSB] Update to dtc 1.6.1

On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 12:20 PM Hesham Almatary wrote: > > Does RISC-V need that too? Not based on the current bsets. $ grep -r dtc * 6/rtems-moxie.bset:devel/dtc-1.6.0-1 6/rtems-microblaze.bset:devel/dtc-1.6.0-1 7/rtems-moxie.bset:devel/dtc-1.6.0-1 Alex.. the grep shows that 7/microblaze is

Re: [PATCH RSB] Update to dtc 1.6.1

Does RISC-V need that too? On Thu, 28 Oct 2021 at 16:41, Alex White wrote: > This bumps the dtc version from 1.6.0 to 1.6.1. Building 1.6.0 on > FreeBSD 13 was unsuccessful, but 1.6.1 appears to build fine. > --- > bare/config/devel/dtc-1.6.1-1.cfg | 18 ++ >

[PATCH RSB] Update to dtc 1.6.1

This bumps the dtc version from 1.6.0 to 1.6.1. Building 1.6.0 on FreeBSD 13 was unsuccessful, but 1.6.1 appears to build fine. --- bare/config/devel/dtc-1.6.1-1.cfg | 18 ++ bare/config/devel/dtc.bset | 2 +- bare/config/devel/qemu-couverture.bset | 2 +-

Re: [PATCH RSB] microblaze: Fix FreeBSD 13 build

Can you fix the same thing on the other architectures that include dtc? I think the MIPS and moxie need it at least. Also make sure to the RTEMS 7 configurations get the same change. And.. there is a base/ bset for dtc which needs bumping. Bet you didn't expect this much fun feedback. :)

[PATCH RSB] microblaze: Fix FreeBSD 13 build

This bumps the dtc version included in the MicroBlaze toolchain from 1.6.0 to 1.6.1. Building 1.6.0 on FreeBSD 13 was unsuccessful, but 1.6.1 appears to build fine. --- bare/config/devel/dtc-1.6.1-1.cfg| 18 ++ rtems/config/6/rtems-microblaze.bset | 2 +- 2 files changed, 19

[PATCH RSB v2] rtems-kernel: Implement kernel recipe using waf

Closes #4145 --- rtems/config/tools/rtems-kernel-6.cfg | 6 +- rtems/config/tools/rtems-kernel-common.cfg | 125 source-builder/rtems-kernel-config-check | 147 + source-builder/sb/options.py | 135

Re: [PATCH RSB] rtems-tools-6.cfg: Bump hash to include MicroBlaze

OK and thanks Chris On 19/10/21 2:09 am, Alex White wrote: > Hash: 323007a6b520140a20b2e268c90b78ff67afaf45 > --- > rtems/config/tools/rtems-tools-6.cfg | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/rtems/config/tools/rtems-tools-6.cfg >

[PATCH RSB] rtems-tools-6.cfg: Bump hash to include MicroBlaze

Hash: 323007a6b520140a20b2e268c90b78ff67afaf45 --- rtems/config/tools/rtems-tools-6.cfg | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/rtems/config/tools/rtems-tools-6.cfg b/rtems/config/tools/rtems-tools-6.cfg index cfb..4158753 100644 ---

RE: Building rtems-kernel with RSB

ping -Original Message- From: devel On Behalf Of Ryan Long Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2021 5:25 PM To: devel@rtems.org Subject: Building rtems-kernel with RSB Hi, I'm trying to build rtems-kernel with the RSB. I haven't gotten it to work. I'm getting "Undefined reference to&qu

Re: [PATCH RSB v3] Remove automake/autoconf from rtems 6 tools

yes > > -%define _disable_reporting yes > > -%define _disable_installing yes > > - > > -%include 6/rtems-autotools-base.bset > > diff --git a/rtems/config/6/rtems-autotools.bset > b/rtems/config/6/rtems-autotools.bset > > deleted file mode 100644 >

Re: [PATCH RSB v3] Remove automake/autoconf from rtems 6 tools

g yes > - > -%include 6/rtems-autotools-base.bset > diff --git a/rtems/config/6/rtems-autotools.bset > b/rtems/config/6/rtems-autotools.bset > deleted file mode 100644 > index e57d25d..000 > --- a/rtems/config/6/rtems-autotools.bset > +++ /dev/null > @@ -1,2

Re: RSB

-toolchain-CPU. Ideally rtems-tools would be separate. The CPU has to be x86 etc. I am not comfortable with a target arch being mixed in here. > Maybe a variable to define the package name to override some default. I think the naming needs to be consistent for the RSB. How it is deployed is le

Re: RSB

ated so in installers I have created > in the > past I had the installer build the packages using the install prefix. > This one isn't critical as we aren't using it going forward. This is an issue on 5 and older. > > The rtems-tools tarball has everything I listed above. Beyond &g

Re: RSB

relocated so in installers I have created in the past I had the installer build the packages using the install prefix. > The rtems-tools tarball has everything I listed above. Beyond > rtems-tools, binutils, > gcc/newlib, and gdb, I suppose it also includes sis or dtc on some > archite

Building rtems-kernel with RSB

Hi, I'm trying to build rtems-kernel with the RSB. I haven't gotten it to work. I'm getting "Undefined reference to" errors for variables defined in tls.h (_TLS_Data_size, _TLS_Data_begin, etc.). I noticed that they are being defined in linkcmds.base in my bsp-install directory. T

[PATCH RSB v3] Remove automake/autoconf from rtems 6 tools

uses autoconf and automake and building RTEMS in the RSB requires -# bootstrapping and this requires a current autoconf and automake. The RSB -# provides to support by: -# -# 1. Building and installing autoconf and automake with a prefix to a -# temporary internal path. -# 2. Using the temporary

Re: [PATCH RSB v2] Remove automake/autoconf from rtems 6 tools

t > > +++ /dev/null > > @@ -1,11 +0,0 @@ > > -# > > -# Do not use via the command line. > > -# > > - > > -%define _internal_autotools yes > > -%define _disable_collecting yes > > -%define _disable_packaging yes > > -%define _disable_r

Re: [PATCH RSB v2] Remove automake/autoconf from rtems 6 tools

_disable_packaging yes > -%define _disable_reporting yes > -%define _disable_installing yes > - > -%include 6/rtems-autotools-base.bset > diff --git a/rtems/config/6/rtems-autotools.bset > b/rtems/config/6/rtems-autotools.bset > deleted file mode 100644 > ind

Re: [PATCH RSB] Remove automake/autoconf from rtems 6 tools

On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 9:50 AM Gedare Bloom wrote: > > Hi Joel, > > On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 8:42 AM Joel Sherrill wrote: > > > > These are unneeded with the waf build system. > > > > Closes #4081. > > You should also git rm the rtems-autotools* files? I thought the ones in bare were for use

[PATCH RSB v2] Remove automake/autoconf from rtems 6 tools

and building RTEMS in the RSB requires -# bootstrapping and this requires a current autoconf and automake. The RSB -# provides to support by: -# -# 1. Building and installing autoconf and automake with a prefix to a -# temporary internal path. -# 2. Using the temporary internal build, build

Re: [PATCH RSB] Remove automake/autoconf from rtems 6 tools

Hi Joel, On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 8:42 AM Joel Sherrill wrote: > > These are unneeded with the waf build system. > > Closes #4081. You should also git rm the rtems-autotools* files? > --- > rtems/config/6/rtems-default.bset| 2 -- > rtems/config/6/rtems-microblaze.bset | 2 -- > 2 files

[PATCH RSB] Remove automake/autoconf from rtems 6 tools

These are unneeded with the waf build system. Closes #4081. --- rtems/config/6/rtems-default.bset| 2 -- rtems/config/6/rtems-microblaze.bset | 2 -- 2 files changed, 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/rtems/config/6/rtems-default.bset b/rtems/config/6/rtems-default.bset index 1b60066..0c07b08

Re: RSB

not. The tools should be > tagged with the host arch details if we add anything. The issue is that the tarball name is wrong and the rtems-tools one rtems-tools, binutils, gcc/newlib, and gdb. It includes EVERYTHING that is built when you use 6/rtems-arm. The automake tarball has au

Re: RSB

. Not sure which but just saying automake-1.12.6 > and including autoconf is not right. It would seem the tar name is not the parent bset. > The issue I mentioned is that the same rtems-tools-@t...@-1.tar.bz2 > is used for every architecture. Perhaps rtems-tools-@ARCH@-@t...@-1.tar.bz2. > Then you can

Re: RSB

s. Not sure which but just saying automake-1.12.6 and including autoconf is not right. The issue I mentioned is that the same rtems-tools-@t...@-1.tar.bz2 is used for every architecture. Perhaps rtems-tools-@ARCH@-@t...@-1.tar.bz2. Then you can script building all architectures without renaming

Re: RSB

On 15/9/21 4:49 am, Joel Sherrill wrote: > On Mon, Sep 13, 2021, 7:02 PM Joel Sherrill > wrote: > On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 6:54 PM Chris Johns > wrote: > > On 13/9/21 11:20 pm, Joel Sherrill wrote: > > > Hi > > > > > > If

Re: RSB

On Mon, Sep 13, 2021, 7:02 PM Joel Sherrill wrote: > On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 6:54 PM Chris Johns wrote: > > > > On 13/9/21 11:20 pm, Joel Sherrill wrote: > > > Hi > > > > > > If building a bset tar file, does it matter if the installation prefix > > > is writable? > > > > > >

Re: RSB

On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 6:54 PM Chris Johns wrote: > > On 13/9/21 11:20 pm, Joel Sherrill wrote: > > Hi > > > > If building a bset tar file, does it matter if the installation prefix > > is writable? > > > > ../source-builder/sb-set-builder --bset-tar-file --log=l-i386.txt > >

Re: RSB

On 13/9/21 11:20 pm, Joel Sherrill wrote: > Hi > > If building a bset tar file, does it matter if the installation prefix > is writable? > > ../source-builder/sb-set-builder --bset-tar-file --log=l-i386.txt > --prefix=/rtems/tools 5/rtems-i386 > RTEMS Source Builder - Set Builder, 5

[PATCH RSB v1 2/2] rtems-gcc-head-newlib-head.cfg: Add newlib patch

-head.cfg @@ -13,6 +13,9 @@ %source set newlib --rsb-file=newlib-%{newlib_version}.tar.gz https://codeload.github.com/RTEMS/sourceware-mirror-newlib-cygwin/tar.gz/%{newlib_version} %hash sha512 newlib-%{newlib_version}.tar.gz

[PATCH RSB v1 0/2] Update newlib for ILP32

Hi, These patches add some of the code that we are waiting for newlib to pull. Thanks, Ryan Ryan Long (2): rtems-gcc-10-newlib-head.cfg: Add newlib patch rtems-gcc-head-newlib-head.cfg: Add newlib patch rtems/config/tools/rtems-gcc-10-newlib-head.cfg | 3 +++

[PATCH RSB v1 1/2] rtems-gcc-10-newlib-head.cfg: Add newlib patch

Adds patch to add sanitation to the padding of bits and size_t types for AArch64 tools builds with newlib. These changes have been made in ARM, but newlib has yet to pull them. This can be removed once newlib has pulled the code. Updates #4510 --- rtems/config/tools/rtems-gcc-10-newlib-head.cfg

RSB

Hi If building a bset tar file, does it matter if the installation prefix is writable? ../source-builder/sb-set-builder --bset-tar-file --log=l-i386.txt --prefix=/rtems/tools 5/rtems-i386 RTEMS Source Builder - Set Builder, 5 (c7870f6e6199) error: prefix is not writable: /rtems/tools It does if

RE: [PATCH RSB] rtems-gcc-10-newlib-head.cfg: Add newlib patch

in the CFLAGS_OPTIMIZE_V list From: Joel Sherrill Sent: Tuesday, September 7, 2021 12:27 PM To: Mr. Andrei Chichak Cc: Ryan Long ; rtems-de...@rtems.org Subject: Re: [PATCH RSB] rtems-gcc-10-newlib-head.cfg: Add newlib patch On Tue, Sep 7, 2021, 12:18 PM Mr. Andrei Chichak mailto:gro...@chichak.ca>>

Re: [PATCH RSB v2 2/2] rtems-gcc-head-newlib-head.cfg: Add newlib patch

On 8/9/21 4:08 am, Gedare Bloom wrote: > Has this issue been raised with newlib? I didn't see anything on their > ml. The temporary workaround is fine with me. I would like to understand how temporary this will be. Chris ___ devel mailing list

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >