| # 07:35:26 | diorcety | joins #crosstool-ng |
| # 09:22:02 | y_morin | joins #crosstool-ng |
| # 11:34:35 | strobelight | joins #crosstool-ng |
| # 11:39:24 | strobelight | quits : Ping timeout: 245 seconds |
| # 11:53:11 | strobelight | joins #crosstool-ng |
| # 13:19:18 | diorcety1 | joins #crosstool-ng |
| # 13:20:51 | diorcety | quits : Ping timeout: 276 seconds |
| # 13:26:52 | diorcety1 | quits : Ping timeout: 272 seconds |
| # 14:39:55 | diorcety | joins #crosstool-ng |
| # 14:53:45 | strobelight | quits : Remote host closed the connection |
| # 14:54:22 | strobelight | joins #crosstool-ng |
| # 15:40:28 | enunes | joins #crosstool-ng |
| # 15:43:08 | enunes | Hello! I have generated a few toolchains using using crosstool-ng, and when running the test-suite they show a few unexpected errors. Mostly powerpc targets, but they all show in average the same amount, and they all seem to work fine. How much worried should I be about the unexpected errors? Is there a not-so-much-expensive way to determine whether I should be worried or not, as opposed to analyzing each one individually? |
| # 16:17:30 | diorcety | quits : Quit: Leaving. |
| # 16:42:55 | y_morin | quits : Remote host closed the connection |
| # 16:44:23 | y_morin | joins #crosstool-ng |
| # 17:39:23 | diorcety | joins #crosstool-ng |
| # 18:27:49 | enunes | quits : Quit: Lost terminal |
| # 18:33:06 | djerome | joins #crosstool-ng |
| # 18:43:33 | bhundven | hi kos_tom |
| # 19:02:04 | djerome | quits : Remote host closed the connection |
| # 19:05:53 | bhundven | kos_tom: this: http://www.openadk.org/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?p=uclibc-ng.git;a=summary ?? |
| # 19:06:46 | kos_tom | well, you have stable releases at http://www.uclibc-ng.org/trac/ |
| # 19:06:50 | kos_tom | available as tarballs |
| # 19:07:48 | bhundven | right, I'd like both in ct-ng, as we now have git ref support https://github.com/crosstool-ng/crosstool-ng/commit/f95b34d52fb2ff58cddbc426f8f008f83734f96f |
| # 19:10:01 | bhundven | So, I'm curious if I should drop uClibc and use uClibc-ng, or should I just add another libc entry for uClibc-ng and keep uClibc as well? |
| # 19:11:02 | bhundven | kos_tom: do we see uClibc-ng as eglibc was to glibc |
| # 19:11:30 | bhundven | kos_tom: in other words, will uClibc-ng get merged back into uClibc, and then uClibc-ng dies? |
| # 19:12:23 | bhundven | eglibc really thrashed ct-ng a bit. |
| # 19:12:49 | bhundven | I don't want to repeat that with uClibc-ng |
| # 19:49:30 | kos_tom | bhundven: for now, in Buildroot, we've simply added uClibc-ng as another uClibc version |
| # 19:56:05 | bhundven | kos_tom: ok |
| # 21:11:05 | strobelight | quits : Quit: strobelight |
| # 21:12:41 | diorcety | quits : Quit: Leaving. |
| # 21:14:38 | y_morin | bhundven: Hey! Yes, uClibc-ng is still quite similar to uClibc, so it still makes sense to treat them as a single C library, with different versions. |
| # 21:15:47 | y_morin | bhundven: At worse, you'd get a few conditionals in the build script. |
| # 21:16:41 | y_morin | bhundven: The only conditional code we have in Buildroot is installing symlins for the dynamic linker: http://git.buildroot.org/buildroot/tree/package/uclibc/uclibc.mk#n435 |
| # 21:27:56 | bhundven | ok, so at first glance, isn't too bad (famous last words) |
| # 21:28:05 | bhundven | y_morin: ^^^ |
| # 21:29:04 | bhundven | y_morin: so seems we should add diorcety, mingwandroid, and Andy(?) to cplc? |
| # 21:29:21 | bhundven | idk if I missed anyone |
| # 21:47:58 | fuesika1 | joins #crosstool-ng |
| # 21:48:02 | fuesika1 | parts #crosstool-ng |
| # 22:09:37 | y_morin | quits : Quit: Nighty Night! |