[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: glibc

> Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 21:27:23 +0100
> From: Uwe Reimann <dev-etrax@xxxxxxx.net>

> I tried to generate the patches myself by running diff between 
> cris-dist-glibc-1.25 and glibc-2.2.3 + linuxthreads-2.2.3. This results 
> in a huge (~5.5mb) diff file which seems to change almost every 
> architecture. Should i run diff agains something else than glibc-2.2.3? 

I don't know what would be the best to diff against.

> What is cris-dist-glibc-1.25 based on?

Glibc CVS as of "2001-04-08 14:00 CET".  After that point, most
of the CRIS port patches were accepted, so there's surely a
later, better timestamp which would give a smaller patch set.

> I am currently trying to compile glibc for cris with gcc-3.2.2 and 
> current binutils. The only glibc where this works seems to be 
> cris-dist-glibc-1.25.

Good luck.  I wish there was a new devboard_lx release so there
would be a point in making a gcc-3.2.1 (and later)-based
cris-dist release public.  With the current release, it'd just
cause build problems with no big advantage: apps, tools and the
kernel needed tweaks.

> That's why I am asking for the patches.

I'll arrange to generate patches against the glibc "vendor"
branch.  If you diff against CVS checked out with the timestamp
above, you should get an identical patch set.

brgds, H-P