Hello,
is there somewhere a prebuilt build environment for Fiasco/L4-Env/ DROPS? My primary development box (and in fact all PCs I own) run FreeBSD and I do not plan to switch to some GNU/Linux which most parts of the build process seem to assume. Even a Linux build would be useful to me, as I could run it using the Linuxulator.
Regards,
On Mon Aug 15, 2005 at 17:58:37 +0200, Julian Stecklina wrote:
is there somewhere a prebuilt build environment for Fiasco/L4-Env/ DROPS? My primary development box (and in fact all PCs I own) run FreeBSD and I do not plan to switch to some GNU/Linux which most parts of the build process seem to assume. Even a Linux build would be useful to me, as I could run it using the Linuxulator.
There's no such build available because I guess it would not work reliably in most cases. When you can use Linuxulator, why doesn't it work to build everything from scratch? (Not knowing any details about this.) Or use qemu or similar?
Adam
On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 21:02:08 +0200 Adam Lackorzynski adam@os.inf.tu-dresden.de wrote:
On Mon Aug 15, 2005 at 17:58:37 +0200, Julian Stecklina wrote:
is there somewhere a prebuilt build environment for Fiasco/L4-Env/ DROPS? My primary development box (and in fact all PCs I own) run FreeBSD and I do not plan to switch to some GNU/Linux which most parts of the build process seem to assume. Even a Linux build would be useful to me, as I could run it using the Linuxulator.
There's no such build available because I guess it would not work reliably in most cases. When you can use Linuxulator, why doesn't it work to build everything from scratch? (Not knowing any details about this.)
This would require that I have a fully working cross-compiler environment rather than running drops' build tools as linux executables and compile with FreeBSD's native cc. I will try how far I get with the former, but not on my laptop that I use for work. There is a slight chance that I break my system compiler which would be quite devastating on FreeBSD.
Or use qemu or similar?
I already thought of this. I could run a Linux inside qemu and NFS export my home directory to it. Thus I could edit on (fast) FreeBSD and compile on (slow, emulated) Linux. But this is a huge waste of disk space...
Then again I could try to get the build environment working on FreeBSD, which would be a benefit for all. Last time I tried it was a very frustrating day (hardcoded paths, depending on dynamically linked gcc, non-POSIXsms). Ok, if I look at the code tree at work, I guess it is a common evil to have non-portable build environments. ;)
Regards,
On Mon Aug 15, 2005 at 21:27:16 +0200, Julian Stecklina wrote:
On Mon, 15 Aug 2005 21:02:08 +0200 Adam Lackorzynski adam@os.inf.tu-dresden.de wrote:
On Mon Aug 15, 2005 at 17:58:37 +0200, Julian Stecklina wrote:
is there somewhere a prebuilt build environment for Fiasco/L4-Env/ DROPS? My primary development box (and in fact all PCs I own) run FreeBSD and I do not plan to switch to some GNU/Linux which most parts of the build process seem to assume. Even a Linux build would be useful to me, as I could run it using the Linuxulator.
There's no such build available because I guess it would not work reliably in most cases. When you can use Linuxulator, why doesn't it work to build everything from scratch? (Not knowing any details about this.)
This would require that I have a fully working cross-compiler environment rather than running drops' build tools as linux executables and compile with FreeBSD's native cc. I will try how far I get with the former, but not on my laptop that I use for work. There is a slight chance that I break my system compiler which would be quite devastating on FreeBSD.
Ok, true for the tools/surroundings, the packages itself should be compilable with any compiler for x86, I hope.
Or use qemu or similar?
I already thought of this. I could run a Linux inside qemu and NFS export my home directory to it. Thus I could edit on (fast) FreeBSD and compile on (slow, emulated) Linux.
That's what I was thinking of.
But this is a huge waste of disk space...
Somewhat.
Then again I could try to get the build environment working on FreeBSD, which would be a benefit for all. Last time I tried it was a very frustrating day (hardcoded paths, depending on dynamically linked gcc, non-POSIXsms). Ok, if I look at the code tree at work, I guess it is a common evil to have non-portable build environments. ;)
Would be cool. :) Unfortunately we have no *BSD addict here so this has never been tackled. As a hint, select the dietlibc mode in the config and thus bootstrap/roottask. oskit and old rmgr will go sooner or later and putting any effort there is not worth it.
Adam
On Tue, 16 Aug 2005 01:09:53 +0200 Adam Lackorzynski adam@os.inf.tu-dresden.de wrote:
Then again I could try to get the build environment working on FreeBSD, which would be a benefit for all. Last time I tried it was a very frustrating day (hardcoded paths, depending on dynamically linked gcc, non-POSIXsms). Ok, if I look at the code tree at work, I guess it is a common evil to have non-portable build environments. ;)
Would be cool. :) Unfortunately we have no *BSD addict here so this has never been tackled. As a hint, select the dietlibc mode in the config and thus bootstrap/roottask. oskit and old rmgr will go sooner or later and putting any effort there is not worth it.
Thanks for the hint. There is still lots of time in the semester break to try this again. And about not having an BSD addict around: my Hauptstudium is just beginning and there is still lots of free time to fill with microkernel-related lectures at the TUD. ;)
Regards,
l4-hackers@os.inf.tu-dresden.de