Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] toolchain/uClibc: add support of uClibc-ng

On 2015-09-30 22:49, Alexey Brodkin wrote: > Hi Alexander, > > On Wed, 2015-09-30 at 22:37 +0200, Alexander Couzens wrote: >> Hi, >> >> what's the state of this patch? >> >> I'm unbreaking sparc for OpenWrt and uclibc is broken as already >> mentioned. musl doesn't support sparc :(. > >

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] toolchain/uClibc: add support of uClibc-ng

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hi, what's the state of this patch? I'm unbreaking sparc for OpenWrt and uclibc is broken as already mentioned. musl doesn't support sparc :(. Best, lynxis On Wed, 26 Aug 2015 21:11:22 +0300 Alexey Brodkin wrote: >

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] toolchain/uClibc: add support of uClibc-ng

Hi Alexander, On Wed, 2015-09-30 at 22:37 +0200, Alexander Couzens wrote: > Hi, > > what's the state of this patch? > > I'm unbreaking sparc for OpenWrt and uclibc is broken as already > mentioned. musl doesn't support sparc :(. Unfortunately I haven't heard anything back except that musl is

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] toolchain/uClibc: add support of uClibc-ng

On 2015-08-28 01:34, Adam Kuklycz wrote: Fair enough. MUSL: -rw-r--r-- 1 adamk adamk 6700676 Aug 27 23:15 root.squashfs UCLIBC: -rw-r--r-- 1 adamk adamk 6601764 Aug 27 14:19 root.squashfs So about 100KB difference. Running Ubuntu 14.04.2 LTS x64 here. I guess what I am

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] toolchain/uClibc: add support of uClibc-ng

Hi Felix Here is the output you requested. Let me know if there's anything else you'd like. adamk@Precision-M4500:~/ChaosCalmer-r46734$ ./scripts/diffconfig.sh CONFIG_TARGET_ar71xx=y CONFIG_TARGET_ar71xx_generic=y CONFIG_TARGET_ar71xx_generic_Default=y CONFIG_DEVEL=y CONFIG_TOOLCHAINOPTS=y

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] toolchain/uClibc: add support of uClibc-ng

Just following up on the suspected memory leak, and image build sizes. With the memory leak, it's not a memory leak as such rather than conntrackd filling things up with a log file. After 22 hours of running: root@gateway-openwrt:/tmp/log# ls -l -rw---1 root root 30080612

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] toolchain/uClibc: add support of uClibc-ng

On 2015-08-28 01:03, Adam Kuklycz wrote: Just following up on the suspected memory leak, and image build sizes. With the memory leak, it's not a memory leak as such rather than conntrackd filling things up with a log file. After 22 hours of running: root@gateway-openwrt:/tmp/log# ls -l

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] toolchain/uClibc: add support of uClibc-ng

Fair enough. MUSL: -rw-r--r-- 1 adamk adamk 6700676 Aug 27 23:15 root.squashfs UCLIBC: -rw-r--r-- 1 adamk adamk 6601764 Aug 27 14:19 root.squashfs So about 100KB difference. Running Ubuntu 14.04.2 LTS x64 here. I guess what I am looking at is the final product, which is around 300KB

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] toolchain/uClibc: add support of uClibc-ng

On 2015-08-27 01:48, Adam Kuklycz wrote: Hi all, I was wondering why OpenWRT switched to musl -- is it purely because uclibc hasn't actually maintained their code properly? That's only part of the reason. Aside from the maintainenance, the code quality of uClibc is also poor compared to

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] toolchain/uClibc: add support of uClibc-ng

Hi Felix Thanks for clarifying. I've also noticed what appears to be a memory leak in my latest build as well which I am working on drilling down now. After a couple days of uptime the device is out of memory. It's much more pronounced when doing downloads with many connections

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] toolchain/uClibc: add support of uClibc-ng

Hi John, On Wed, 2015-08-26 at 20:20 +0200, John Crispin wrote: Hi, On 26/08/2015 20:11, Alexey Brodkin wrote: uClibc-ng is a spin-off of original uClibc, see http://www.uclibc-ng.org/ We try to regularly add changes from uClibc to uClibc-ng. We even sent patches and bug reports to

[OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] toolchain/uClibc: add support of uClibc-ng

uClibc-ng is a spin-off of original uClibc, see http://www.uclibc-ng.org/ We try to regularly add changes from uClibc to uClibc-ng. We even sent patches and bug reports to the uClibc mailing list. The config file is compatible between uClibc-ng 1.0 and uClibc git master. This might change in the

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] toolchain/uClibc: add support of uClibc-ng

Hi, On 26/08/2015 20:11, Alexey Brodkin wrote: uClibc-ng is a spin-off of original uClibc, see http://www.uclibc-ng.org/ We try to regularly add changes from uClibc to uClibc-ng. We even sent patches and bug reports to the uClibc mailing list. The config file is compatible between uClibc-ng

Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] toolchain/uClibc: add support of uClibc-ng

Hi all, I was wondering why OpenWRT switched to musl -- is it purely because uclibc hasn't actually maintained their code properly? One of the things I have noticed since the CC trunk builds I did with kernel 3.18.11 + uclibc is that the image sizes have ballooned out by a fair bit. For

[OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] toolchain/uClibc: add support of uClibc-ng

uClibc-ng is a spin-off of original uClibc, see http://www.uclibc-ng.org/ We try to regularly add changes from uClibc to uClibc-ng. We even sent patches and bug reports to the uClibc mailing list. The config file is compatible between uClibc-ng 1.0 and uClibc git master. This might change in the