From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1N5RBE-0003N3-K3 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 03 Nov 2009 21:44:44 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 46529E08D3; Tue, 3 Nov 2009 21:44:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.gmx.net (mail.gmx.net [213.165.64.20]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id BF140E08D3 for ; Tue, 3 Nov 2009 21:44:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 03 Nov 2009 21:44:41 -0000 Received: from HSI-KBW-078-042-060-193.hsi3.kabel-badenwuerttemberg.de (EHLO nb.localnet) [78.42.60.193] by mail.gmx.net (mp048) with SMTP; 03 Nov 2009 22:44:41 +0100 X-Authenticated: #497570 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX19yV64/fOtyE/Oq7Ysg2MvjCZ46fmlxWeKv2/Uzy5 L0g0aLZubt1Jhg From: Petric Frank To: gentoo-embedded@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-embedded] Beginner: Target Mips + nommu Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2009 22:44:43 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.12.1 (Linux/2.6.30-gentoo-r4; KDE/4.3.1; i686; ; ) References: <200911011409.02501.pfrank@gmx.de> <20091101134423.2403.qmail@stuge.se> <200911022122.38671.pfrank@gmx.de> In-Reply-To: <200911022122.38671.pfrank@gmx.de> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-embedded@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-embedded@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200911032244.43435.pfrank@gmx.de> X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-FuHaFi: 0.58 X-Archives-Salt: 682a7ebe-d033-4039-8c6d-1bbc068a2cb3 X-Archives-Hash: 464e4b867425090072135b5ddfc00bac Hello, On Monday 02 November 2009 21:22:38 Petric Frank wrote: > > > Is uClinux the proper alternative for this > > > > In general it is the proper alternative for machines without MMU. > > > > > or are the mips kernels available in the portage tree patched to > > > cover this ? > > > > In theory that's possible, but I doubt it. > > Thanks for your hints. > > As far as i understand the cross compile system - the uclibc built by > crossdev is the one the compiled software for the target to be linked > against. Resulting from this the uclibc must reflect the target system > (here especially: no-mmu). > Hope i am right here. > > So i tried to do this using the savedconfig use-flag. I broke to > compilation process while it is compiling uclibc. Then i did a "make > menuconfig" (in /var/tmp/...) and disabled MMU and (as followup) the > target file format to "STATIC FLAT" (i assume PIE is also not possible > because of the missing MMU). > > At restarting the crossdev execution i got an error while installing > uclibc. The compile step of the ebuild went well. At the installation > stage it complains that it is missing "utils/ldconfig.host" when doing > newbin. This can be seen in the ebuild in the src_install step. The > offending line is newbin utils/ldconfig.host ${CTARGET}-ldconfig | die > > So this file seems not to be generated during the uclibc built process when > PIE is off. This applies to ldd.host also. > > What to do now? > Skip this files in the ebuild ? > > Or am i doing too much and the uclibc code is clever enough to disable mmu > logic when the taget it is running on doesn't have it ? Ok - finally i got the toolchain compiled for mips-nommu using sys- devel/crossdev - with some (dirty) patches. Patch 1: ebuild of uclibc - remove " ... | die" suffix when trying to install ldconfig and ldd as they are not there for nommu case Patch 2: for building uclibc use savedconfig use flag. Use modified config to disable mmu and generate static libs only Patch 3: (the worst one) - add a line to toolchain.eclass to add the option -- disable-static to the configure string Maybe this all should into a new use flag for gcc and uclibc named (for example) "nommu". Or an extension to crossdev is a better place ? Would this be worth a bugzilla ticket (against which target ?) ? regards Petric