From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20090714024327.45847b16.eekee57@fastmail.fm> References: <20090714024327.45847b16.eekee57@fastmail.fm> Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2009 18:55:11 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [9fans] building plan9port: arch spec, arm vs armv5tel From: Russ Cox To: plan9port-dev@googlegroups.com Cc: eekee57@fastmail.fm Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Topicbox-Message-UUID: 1e74eedc-ead5-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 +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 w= rote: > 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: =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0ELF 32-bit LSB executable, ARM, versio= n 1 (SYSV), for GNU/Linux 2.6.14, dynamically linked (uses shared libs), no= t 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 spe= cify 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 t= hat particular hack. >