On 26 November 2012 21:27, Mark Salter <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, 2012-11-26 at 20:21 +0000, Markos Chandras wrote: >> Hi Mark, >> >> That's weird. It makes me wonder how come C6X is supported in uClibc >> without the deprecated syscalls. I will have a look > > The upstream kernel requires a patched uClibc. The original c6x support > which went into uClibc was based on a kernel which did have the needed > syscalls. Those syscalls got dropped when the kernel was submitted > upstream. > > >
Hi Mark, Oh I see. So I guess c6x is currently broken in uClibc if one uses the upstream kernel. -- Regards, Markos _______________________________________________ uClibc mailing list [email protected] http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/uclibc
