Am 18.01.2008 um 20:28 schrieb Johannes Schindelin:
Even if another system starts working, if you break existing users,
you did something
wrong. And if you don't care, and don't mind giving existing users
a hard time, you cannot be helped and should go somewhere else.
So you have to be
Am 19.01.2008 um 12:16 schrieb Johannes Schindelin:
Hi,
On Sat, 19 Jan 2008, Markus Hitter wrote:
Am 18.01.2008 um 20:28 schrieb Johannes Schindelin:
Even if another system starts working, if you break existing users,
you did something wrong. And if you don't care, and don't mind
Hi,
On Sat, 19 Jan 2008, Markus Hitter wrote:
Am 18.01.2008 um 20:28 schrieb Johannes Schindelin:
Even if another system starts working, if you break existing users,
you did something wrong. And if you don't care, and don't mind giving
existing users a hard time, you cannot be helped
Hi,
On Sat, 19 Jan 2008, Markus Hitter wrote:
Am 19.01.2008 um 12:16 schrieb Johannes Schindelin:
On Sat, 19 Jan 2008, Markus Hitter wrote:
Am 18.01.2008 um 20:28 schrieb Johannes Schindelin:
Even if another system starts working, if you break existing
users, you did
Am 18.01.2008 um 07:19 schrieb Alexander Graf:
On Jan 18, 2008, at 12:25 AM, Andreas Färber wrote:
Am 17.01.2008 um 18:34 schrieb Alexander Graf:
I tested sparc-softmmu, ppc-softmmu, ppc64-softmmu, i386-softmmu
on Linux/i386 from your gcc4 branch. It compiles okay on gcc
(GCC) 4.1.3
Hi,
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Mike Kronenberg wrote:
I tried it quick and dirty with Alex osx-patch (without exec-all.h part)
on a x86_64. everything except ppc-softmmu
(/tmp/qemu/target-ppc/exec.h:135:2: error: #endif without #if) compiled
fine. I'm going to make some more test and try to use
On Jan 18, 2008, at 4:41 PM, Fabrice Bellard wrote:
Alexander Graf wrote:
This patch is mostly a cleanup of Michael Matz's patch with the ideas
that came last time included.
I must say I don't like such patches because they are likely to
break with every new GCC version.
Basically
Alexander Graf wrote:
This patch is mostly a cleanup of Michael Matz's patch with the ideas
that came last time included.
I must say I don't like such patches because they are likely to break
with every new GCC version.
Moreover, I will commit in the next few days a new code generator in
Hi,
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Alexander Graf wrote:
On Jan 18, 2008, at 4:41 PM, Fabrice Bellard wrote:
Alexander Graf wrote:
This patch is mostly a cleanup of Michael Matz's patch with the
ideas that came last time included.
I must say I don't like such patches because they are
Hi,
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Markus Hitter wrote:
Am 18.01.2008 um 19:10 schrieb Johannes Schindelin:
But that broke a previously working system, and that's why I agree
with Fabrice.
At the same time it made a more modern system work. Refusing a patch
because it exposes existing bugs
Hi,
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008, Fabrice Bellard wrote:
Moreover, I will commit in the next few days a new code generator in
QEMU which will utimately solve the compilation problems. In its current
form it still relies on dyngen so that legacy micro operations still
work, but in the end dyngen
Am 17.01.2008 um 18:11 schrieb Andreas Färber:
Hi,
Am 17.01.2008 um 16:29 schrieb Johannes Schindelin:
I found two extra #endifs, in target-mips/exec.h and target-ppc/
exec.h. I
updated my gcc4 branch.
I tested sparc-softmmu, ppc-softmmu, ppc64-softmmu, i386-softmmu on
Linux/i386 from
Am 18.01.2008 um 19:10 schrieb Johannes Schindelin:
But that broke a previously working system, and that's why I agree
with
Fabrice.
At the same time it made a more modern system work. Refusing a patch
because it exposes existing bugs isn't exactly intelligent.
Markus
- - - - - - - -
This patch is mostly a cleanup of Michael Matz's patch with the ideas
that came last time included.
Index: qemu/softmmu_header.h
===
--- qemu.orig/softmmu_header.h
+++ qemu/softmmu_header.h
@@ -189,9 +189,11 @@ static inline void
Hi,
On Thu, 17 Jan 2008, Alexander Graf wrote:
This patch is mostly a cleanup of Michael Matz's patch with the ideas
that came last time included.
Maybe the patch subject could be prepare i386 host for gcc4, step 1)?
Index: qemu/softmmu_header.h
Johannes Schindelin wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, 17 Jan 2008, Alexander Graf wrote:
This patch is mostly a cleanup of Michael Matz's patch with the ideas
that came last time included.
Maybe the patch subject could be prepare i386 host for gcc4, step 1)?
Basically it fixes it, just
Alexander Graf wrote:
This patch is mostly a cleanup of Michael Matz's patch with the ideas
that came last time included.
I didn't include one file in the previous patch, sorry.
This patch also includes Johannes' catch to use #ifdefs around most changes.
Index: qemu/softmmu_header.h
Hi
With this I can compile, but qemu segfaults now when trying to start a ros
image:
Starting program: /home/tux/QEMU/qemu -m 192 ros/ros
[Thread debugging using libthread_db enabled]
[New Thread -1212344640 (LWP 18268)]
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
[Switching to Thread
Hi Alexander,
On Thu, 17 Jan 2008, Alexander Graf wrote:
Johannes Schindelin wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, 17 Jan 2008, Alexander Graf wrote:
This patch is mostly a cleanup of Michael Matz's patch with the ideas
that came last time included.
Maybe the patch subject could be prepare i386
Hi,
On Thu, 17 Jan 2008, Alexander Graf wrote:
Alexander Graf wrote:
This patch is mostly a cleanup of Michael Matz's patch with the ideas
that came last time included.
I didn't include one file in the previous patch, sorry. This patch also
includes Johannes' catch to use #ifdefs around
Jens Arm wrote:
Hi
With this I can compile, but qemu segfaults now when trying to start a ros
image:
Starting program: /home/tux/QEMU/qemu -m 192 ros/ros
[Thread debugging using libthread_db enabled]
[New Thread -1212344640 (LWP 18268)]
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation
Hi,
I get an error with sh4-linux-user and sh4eb-linux-user:
../dyngen -o op.h op.o
dyngen: ret or jmp expected at the end of op_cmp_str_T0_T1
There is a RETURN(); statement at the end of
target-sh4/op.c:op_cmp_str_T0_T1() though, so I am puzzled...
It also says target-ppc/exec.h:44:26:
Alexander Graf wrote:
[snip]
Index: qemu/target-alpha/cpu.h
===
--- qemu.orig/target-alpha/cpu.h
+++ qemu/target-alpha/cpu.h
@@ -275,6 +275,8 @@ struct CPUAlphaState {
* used to emulate 64 bits target on 32 bits hosts
Alexander Graf wrote:
Jens Arm wrote:
Hi
With this I can compile, but qemu segfaults now when trying to start a ros
image:
Starting program: /home/tux/QEMU/qemu -m 192 ros/ros
[Thread debugging using libthread_db enabled]
[New Thread -1212344640 (LWP 18268)]
Program received signal
Hi,
On Thu, 17 Jan 2008, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
It fixed it for me, but only after a make distclean ./configure
make. Apparently there are still some dependencies which are not
right.
Spoke too soon... It introduces an extra #endif in target-mips/exec.h
FWIW I am pushing it (with
Hi,
On Thu, 17 Jan 2008, Alexander Graf wrote:
Alexander Graf wrote:
Jens Arm wrote:
With this I can compile, but qemu segfaults now when trying to start a ros
image:
Starting program: /home/tux/QEMU/qemu -m 192 ros/ros
[Thread debugging using libthread_db enabled]
[New
Johannes Schindelin wrote:
Hi,
I get an error with sh4-linux-user and sh4eb-linux-user:
../dyngen -o op.h op.o
dyngen: ret or jmp expected at the end of op_cmp_str_T0_T1
Yes, and it's mostly right about this. This specific opcode ends with a
jmp, which dyngen does not allow. I leave
Johannes Schindelin wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, 17 Jan 2008, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
It fixed it for me, but only after a make distclean ./configure
make. Apparently there are still some dependencies which are not
right.
Spoke too soon... It introduces an extra #endif in
Johannes Schindelin wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, 17 Jan 2008, Alexander Graf wrote:
Alexander Graf wrote:
Jens Arm wrote:
With this I can compile, but qemu segfaults now when trying to start a ros
image:
Starting program: /home/tux/QEMU/qemu -m 192 ros/ros
[Thread debugging
Hi
OK, now I can boot Reactos, haiku, helenos, dsl, knoppix, freedos, kubuntu
It works with and without kqemu.
If all is correctly emulated or if the speed of qemu is slower or quicker now I
have not tested.
Jens
On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 15:26:23 +0100
Alexander Graf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, 17 Jan 2008, Alexander Graf wrote:
Johannes Schindelin wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, 17 Jan 2008, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
It fixed it for me, but only after a make distclean ./configure
make. Apparently there are still some dependencies which are not
right.
Hi,
On Thu, 17 Jan 2008, Alexander Graf wrote:
Johannes Schindelin wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, 17 Jan 2008, Alexander Graf wrote:
Alexander Graf wrote:
Jens Arm wrote:
With this I can compile, but qemu segfaults now when trying to start a
ros image:
Hi,
Am 17.01.2008 um 16:29 schrieb Johannes Schindelin:
I found two extra #endifs, in target-mips/exec.h and target-ppc/
exec.h. I
updated my gcc4 branch.
I tested sparc-softmmu, ppc-softmmu, ppc64-softmmu, i386-softmmu on
Linux/i386 from your gcc4 branch. It compiles okay on gcc (GCC)
On Jan 17, 2008, at 6:11 PM, Andreas Färber wrote:
Hi,
Am 17.01.2008 um 16:29 schrieb Johannes Schindelin:
I found two extra #endifs, in target-mips/exec.h and target-ppc/
exec.h. I
updated my gcc4 branch.
I tested sparc-softmmu, ppc-softmmu, ppc64-softmmu, i386-softmmu on
Linux/i386
Am 17.01.2008 um 18:34 schrieb Alexander Graf:
I tested sparc-softmmu, ppc-softmmu, ppc64-softmmu, i386-softmmu on
Linux/i386 from your gcc4 branch. It compiles okay on gcc (GCC)
4.1.3 20070929 (prerelease) (Ubuntu 4.1.2-16ubuntu2). Runtime
behavior was identical to CVS+gcc-3.4.
Could
On 18.01.2008, at 00:25, Andreas Färber wrote:
Am 17.01.2008 um 18:34 schrieb Alexander Graf:
I tested sparc-softmmu, ppc-softmmu, ppc64-softmmu, i386-softmmu
on Linux/i386 from your gcc4 branch. It compiles okay on gcc (GCC)
4.1.3 20070929 (prerelease) (Ubuntu 4.1.2-16ubuntu2). Runtime
On 18.01.2008, at 01:40, Mike Kronenberg wrote:
On 18.01.2008, at 00:25, Andreas Färber wrote:
Am 17.01.2008 um 18:34 schrieb Alexander Graf:
I tested sparc-softmmu, ppc-softmmu, ppc64-softmmu, i386-softmmu
on Linux/i386 from your gcc4 branch. It compiles okay on gcc
(GCC) 4.1.3
On Jan 18, 2008, at 12:25 AM, Andreas Färber wrote:
Am 17.01.2008 um 18:34 schrieb Alexander Graf:
I tested sparc-softmmu, ppc-softmmu, ppc64-softmmu, i386-softmmu
on Linux/i386 from your gcc4 branch. It compiles okay on gcc (GCC)
4.1.3 20070929 (prerelease) (Ubuntu 4.1.2-16ubuntu2).
38 matches
Mail list logo
