* [9fans] building plan9port: arch spec, arm vs armv5tel
@ 2009-07-14 1:43 Ethan Grammatikidis
2009-07-14 1:55 ` Russ Cox
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Ethan Grammatikidis @ 2009-07-14 1:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 9fans
Building plan9port on an arm box I get this message several times:
sh: cd: 4: can't cd to armv5tel
At the end of the build the only binary in plan9/bin is mk:
$ file bin/* | grep ELF
bin/mk: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, ARM, version 1 (SYSV), for GNU/Linux 2.6.14, dynamically linked (uses shared libs), not stripped
In src/lib9 I symlinked getcallerpc-arm.c to getcallerpc-armv5tel.c; this made lib9 build but it's not enough to build the executables. How do I specify the architecture to the build system? I guess the setarch command may work, but I'd need to compile it too and I'd ideally like to work without that particular hack.
--
Ethan Grammatikidis
Those who are slower at parsing information must
necessarily be faster at problem-solving.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [9fans] building plan9port: arch spec, arm vs armv5tel
2009-07-14 1:43 [9fans] building plan9port: arch spec, arm vs armv5tel Ethan Grammatikidis
@ 2009-07-14 1:55 ` Russ Cox
2009-07-14 22:12 ` J.R. Mauro
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Russ Cox @ 2009-07-14 1:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: plan9port-dev; +Cc: eekee57
+plan9port-dev
bcc: 9fans
I have just created a mailing list for these questions.
It is not documented anywhere yet - yours is the first.
I would have called the mailing list plan9port-help
but apparently -help is not a valid mailing list suffix.
plan9port-dev@googlegroups.com
There is also an issue tracker at
http://bitbucket.org/rsc/plan9port/issues.
There may be a nicer URL in a few days.
Russ
On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 6:43 PM, Ethan Grammatikidis<eekee57@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> Building plan9port on an arm box I get this message several times:
>
> sh: cd: 4: can't cd to armv5tel
>
>
> At the end of the build the only binary in plan9/bin is mk:
>
> $ file bin/* | grep ELF
> bin/mk: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, ARM, version 1 (SYSV), for GNU/Linux 2.6.14, dynamically linked (uses shared libs), not stripped
>
>
> In src/lib9 I symlinked getcallerpc-arm.c to getcallerpc-armv5tel.c; this made lib9 build but it's not enough to build the executables. How do I specify the architecture to the build system? I guess the setarch command may work, but I'd need to compile it too and I'd ideally like to work without that particular hack.
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [9fans] building plan9port: arch spec, arm vs armv5tel
2009-07-14 1:55 ` Russ Cox
@ 2009-07-14 22:12 ` J.R. Mauro
2009-07-15 0:06 ` Russ Cox
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: J.R. Mauro @ 2009-07-14 22:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs
On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 9:55 PM, Russ Cox<rsc@swtch.com> wrote:
> +plan9port-dev
> bcc: 9fans
>
> I have just created a mailing list for these questions.
> It is not documented anywhere yet - yours is the first.
> I would have called the mailing list plan9port-help
> but apparently -help is not a valid mailing list suffix.
> plan9port-dev@googlegroups.com
Should we put patches here, too?
>
> There is also an issue tracker at
> http://bitbucket.org/rsc/plan9port/issues.
> There may be a nicer URL in a few days.
>
> Russ
>
> On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 6:43 PM, Ethan Grammatikidis<eekee57@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>> Building plan9port on an arm box I get this message several times:
>>
>> sh: cd: 4: can't cd to armv5tel
>>
>>
>> At the end of the build the only binary in plan9/bin is mk:
>>
>> $ file bin/* | grep ELF
>> bin/mk: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, ARM, version 1 (SYSV), for GNU/Linux 2.6.14, dynamically linked (uses shared libs), not stripped
>>
>>
>> In src/lib9 I symlinked getcallerpc-arm.c to getcallerpc-armv5tel.c; this made lib9 build but it's not enough to build the executables. How do I specify the architecture to the build system? I guess the setarch command may work, but I'd need to compile it too and I'd ideally like to work without that particular hack.
>>
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [9fans] building plan9port: arch spec, arm vs armv5tel
2009-07-14 22:12 ` J.R. Mauro
@ 2009-07-15 0:06 ` Russ Cox
2009-07-15 1:03 ` J.R. Mauro
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Russ Cox @ 2009-07-15 0:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs
> Should we put patches here, too?
Yes. I'd like plan9port-dev to have all
the discussion of plan9port development
and problems.
There's a different story for patches that
is still not quite complete, but it's a start.
Look for upload.py in
http://groups.google.com/group/plan9port-dev/t/a1b7f0123e261012
Russ
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [9fans] building plan9port: arch spec, arm vs armv5tel
2009-07-15 0:06 ` Russ Cox
@ 2009-07-15 1:03 ` J.R. Mauro
2009-07-15 15:31 ` Uriel
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: J.R. Mauro @ 2009-07-15 1:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs
On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 8:06 PM, Russ Cox<rsc@swtch.com> wrote:
>> Should we put patches here, too?
>
> Yes. I'd like plan9port-dev to have all
> the discussion of plan9port development
> and problems.
>
> There's a different story for patches that
> is still not quite complete, but it's a start.
> Look for upload.py in
> http://groups.google.com/group/plan9port-dev/t/a1b7f0123e261012
>
> Russ
>
>
Ok, I sent the patch to the mailing list -- I have a lot of local
modifications that shouldn't be published, I don't know if upload.py
would try to send them.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [9fans] building plan9port: arch spec, arm vs armv5tel
2009-07-15 1:03 ` J.R. Mauro
@ 2009-07-15 15:31 ` Uriel
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Uriel @ 2009-07-15 15:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs
What about using a public hg repo and letting others pick what changes
they are interested in?
uriel
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 3:03 AM, J.R. Mauro<jrm8005@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 8:06 PM, Russ Cox<rsc@swtch.com> wrote:
>>> Should we put patches here, too?
>>
>> Yes. I'd like plan9port-dev to have all
>> the discussion of plan9port development
>> and problems.
>>
>> There's a different story for patches that
>> is still not quite complete, but it's a start.
>> Look for upload.py in
>> http://groups.google.com/group/plan9port-dev/t/a1b7f0123e261012
>>
>> Russ
>>
>>
>
> Ok, I sent the patch to the mailing list -- I have a lot of local
> modifications that shouldn't be published, I don't know if upload.py
> would try to send them.
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2009-07-15 15:31 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2009-07-14 1:43 [9fans] building plan9port: arch spec, arm vs armv5tel Ethan Grammatikidis
2009-07-14 1:55 ` Russ Cox
2009-07-14 22:12 ` J.R. Mauro
2009-07-15 0:06 ` Russ Cox
2009-07-15 1:03 ` J.R. Mauro
2009-07-15 15:31 ` Uriel
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).