Re: Pending issues for release

[Isaac Dunham <idunham@lavabit.com>]

On Thu, 18 Oct 2012 14:29:57 -0400
Rich Felker <dalias@aerifal.cx> wrote:

> Hi all,
> Once I confirm that there are no stupid bugs blocking threads from
> working on microblaze (so far I have been unable to test due to buggy
> qemu), I'd like to make a release. Pending issues I'd like to address
> before then include:
> 
> - dl_iterate_phdr patch (npx)
> - sigreturn(?) and other issues npx wanted for unwinding
> - integrating the configure patch for better pcc support

Are there any further comments on that?

My main thought is that using 
+test -z "$LIBCC" && tryldflag LIBCC `$CC -print-file-name=libpcc.a || true`
may be unnecessary; if -print-file-name=libpcc.a works, then there shouldn't be a need for more...
although pcc does have libpccsoftfloat.a as well.

> - inline syscalls for microblaze
> - explicit mips soft-float abi support (mainly for use with broken
>   openwrt kernels)
I'm guessing they disabled the FPU emulation for size: on a router, a few kb can change whether you can (for example) add dropbear instead of using Busybox telnetd; I happen to have one where they couldn't.

On a related note, would it be possible to add "size of a static busybox
binary with a minimal config" (or a static dropbear, or some other
program frequently used for embedded systems) to the libc comparison 
table?  I'm thinking that may be the most meaningful metric for people working on embedded systems.

> - make endian.h more robust for opposite-endian builds (mipsel, armeb)

Don't forget microblazeel (a/k/a microblazele, for the linker)
The linker uses -mbig-endian/-mlittle-endian to select, IUIC.

> And a few other things that might make it in, if I get around to them:
> 
> - subarchs in build system (e.g. mips-softfloat, arm-hardfloat, etc.)
Perhaps x86-sse eventually?
-- 
Isaac Dunham <idunham@lavabit.com>