On Tuesday 21 October 2008, Michael Schnell wrote:
it doesn't matter whether you are ELF/flat/fdpic
Why is flat used for _some_ architectures and not for others ?
it depends on the arch as to whether it is the only choice.
What are the advantages of flat over ELF and vice versa ?
resources
Thanks for the wonderful discussion.
I know little about Blackfin before that, so my understanding is:
* with Blackfin, both FLAT and FDPIC ELF were supported;
* with ARM (no-mmu), still only support FLAT
Is it right ?
2008/10/22 Michael Schnell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thanks a lot !
I should
Hi Arthur,
Arthur Wong wrote:
Thanks for the wonderful discussion.
I know little about Blackfin before that, so my understanding is:
* with Blackfin, both FLAT and FDPIC ELF were supported;
* with ARM (no-mmu), still only support FLAT
Is it right ?
That is certainly correct at the moment.
Thanks tor these answers !
-Michael
___
uClinux-dev mailing list
uClinux-dev@uclinux.org
http://mailman.uclinux.org/mailman/listinfo/uclinux-dev
This message was resent by uclinux-dev@uclinux.org
To unsubscribe see:
Thanks a lot !
I should take a look at the great blackfin docs more often !
-Michael
___
uClinux-dev mailing list
uClinux-dev@uclinux.org
http://mailman.uclinux.org/mailman/listinfo/uclinux-dev
This message was resent by uclinux-dev@uclinux.org
To
uClinux is just linux with some extras, nothing is taken out, so you
are just using a regular linux kernel :-)
So the general paradigm has change once more (or less) than I was aware of.
Originally the was Microcontroller Linux later it was MMU-less Linux
and now it's Linux for Firmware
it doesn't matter whether you are ELF/flat/fdpic
Why is flat used for _some_ architectures and not for others ?
What are the advantages of flat over ELF and vice versa ?
(In fact I don't know exactly what flat means ;) )
-Michael
___
uClinux-dev
Jivin Michael Schnell lays it down ...
uClinux is just linux with some extras, nothing is taken out, so you
are just using a regular linux kernel :-)
So the general paradigm has change once more (or less) than I was aware of.
Originally the was Microcontroller Linux later it was
Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Monday 20 October 2008, Chris Gray wrote:
On Monday 20 October 2008 19:23, Jamie Lokier wrote:
Mike Frysinger wrote:
@@ -237,9 +237,9 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
send_output(\n, 0, send_flag);
if (outbuf) {
-
On Tuesday 21 October 2008, Jamie Lokier wrote:
Btw, in most cases exit() should not be called in a *fork* child
either, let alone *vfork*. It will flush stdio buffers - and they may
get flushed by the parent when it exits too. Same for atexit()
handlers.
Often if there's an exit() in a
Hi Michael,
Michael Schnell wrote:
it doesn't matter whether you are ELF/flat/fdpic
Why is flat used for _some_ architectures and not for others ?
What are the advantages of flat over ELF and vice versa ?
(In fact I don't know exactly what flat means ;) )
FLAT format was the first native
Hello!
When build the e2fsprogs of uClinux-dist-20080808, i have met some errors,
3 files were changed to fix them:
* user/e2fsprogs/misc/logsave.c - all fork should be
changed as vfork
* e2fsprogs/makefile link problem in the
romfs directory
*
Mike Frysinger wrote:
@@ -237,9 +237,9 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
send_output(\n, 0, send_flag);
if (outbuf) {
-pid = fork();
+pid = vfork();
if (pid 0) {
-perror(fork);
+perror(vfork);
On Monday 20 October 2008 19:23, Jamie Lokier wrote:
Mike Frysinger wrote:
@@ -237,9 +237,9 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
send_output(\n, 0, send_flag);
if (outbuf) {
-pid = fork();
+pid = vfork();
if (pid 0) {
-
See question below.
On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 09:39:46AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Monday 20 October 2008, Arthur Wong wrote:
--- user/e2fsprogs.bak/configure2008-10-20 17:32:45.0 +0800
+++ user/e2fsprogs/configure2008-10-20 17:44:57.0 +0800
@@ -3076,7 +3076,7
Jivin Jun Sun lays it down ...
See question below.
On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 09:39:46AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Monday 20 October 2008, Arthur Wong wrote:
--- user/e2fsprogs.bak/configure2008-10-20 17:32:45.0 +0800
+++ user/e2fsprogs/configure2008-10-20
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 08:49:54AM +1000, David McCullough wrote:
Jivin Jun Sun lays it down ...
See question below.
On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 09:39:46AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Monday 20 October 2008, Arthur Wong wrote:
--- user/e2fsprogs.bak/configure2008-10-20
Jivin Jun Sun lays it down ...
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 08:49:54AM +1000, David McCullough wrote:
Jivin Jun Sun lays it down ...
See question below.
On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 09:39:46AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Monday 20 October 2008, Arthur Wong wrote:
---
2008/10/20 Mike Frysinger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Monday 20 October 2008, Arthur Wong wrote:
--- user/e2fsprogs.bak/configure2008-10-20 17:32:45.0 +0800
+++ user/e2fsprogs/configure2008-10-20 17:44:57.0 +0800
@@ -3076,7 +3076,7 @@ if test ${with_ldopts+set} = set; then
On Monday 20 October 2008, Arthur Wong wrote:
2008/10/20 Mike Frysinger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Monday 20 October 2008, Arthur Wong wrote:
--- user/e2fsprogs.bak/configure2008-10-20 17:32:45.0 +0800
+++ user/e2fsprogs/configure2008-10-20 17:44:57.0 +0800
@@ -3076,7
On Monday 20 October 2008, Chris Gray wrote:
On Monday 20 October 2008 19:23, Jamie Lokier wrote:
Mike Frysinger wrote:
@@ -237,9 +237,9 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
send_output(\n, 0, send_flag);
if (outbuf) {
-pid = fork();
+
On Monday 20 October 2008, David McCullough wrote:
Jivin Jun Sun lays it down ...
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 08:49:54AM +1000, David McCullough wrote:
Jivin Jun Sun lays it down ...
On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 09:39:46AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Monday 20 October 2008, Arthur Wong
Jivin Mike Frysinger lays it down ...
On Monday 20 October 2008, David McCullough wrote:
Jivin Jun Sun lays it down ...
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 08:49:54AM +1000, David McCullough wrote:
Jivin Jun Sun lays it down ...
On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 09:39:46AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
23 matches
Mail list logo
