1 |
Come on... you know you want to... |
2 |
|
3 |
Can we get some testing of this please? An updated uclibc is a real |
4 |
blocker for supporting embedded - can we have a push to get this into |
5 |
portage please? |
6 |
|
7 |
Cheers |
8 |
|
9 |
Ed W |
10 |
|
11 |
|
12 |
|
13 |
On 01/03/2012 10:44, Ed W wrote: |
14 |
> Hi, could all uclibc users take a peek at: |
15 |
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=308477 |
16 |
> |
17 |
> I have bumped the ebuild to 0.9.33 and also added some extremely hacky |
18 |
> patches to build iconv (and accidentally also locale) support. From |
19 |
> my limited understanding this almost works as expected and seems very |
20 |
> achievable to get to a fully working state. The iconv support is the |
21 |
> main thing I wanted. Locales seem to be included as part of the same |
22 |
> uclibc config switch, but don't add that much extra space - it would |
23 |
> be nice to have them independently selectable though |
24 |
> |
25 |
> I need some help: |
26 |
> - Testing the iconv stuff and working on the patches so they can go |
27 |
> upstream |
28 |
> - Fixing the ebuild to have an iconv flag to bring this stuff in a |
29 |
> selectable way |
30 |
> - Fixing the ebuild to allow selectable locales in some gentoo |
31 |
> acceptable way? |
32 |
> - Testing with hardened, ie gcc-4.5.3-r2 and the adjusted variable as |
33 |
> per bug (this brings SSP support to gcc on uclibc) |
34 |
> - Testing on as many other architectures than x86 as possible... |
35 |
> |
36 |
> The goal is to get this into tree as a masked ebuild as soon as |
37 |
> possible. The rest of the tree is growing away from supporting uclibc |
38 |
> because its the easiest option. However, if we can get 0.9.33 in good |
39 |
> shape then we have a modern drop in libc replacement which supports |
40 |
> modern hardened compilers, nptl and more - it's then feasible to start |
41 |
> filing bugs to other packages to add small patches as appropriate. In |
42 |
> particular having even partially working iconv support in uclibc would |
43 |
> appear to reduce the number of packages with uclibc conditional |
44 |
> compiles by a large chunk... |
45 |
> |
46 |
> Grateful for help getting this in shape |
47 |
> |
48 |
> Thanks |
49 |
> |
50 |
> Ed W |
51 |
> |