Re: [dev] Re: sta.li progress

2010-12-20 Thread Jens Staal
In the instructions given in the URL below it is described how openssl is compiled with this bionic: https://bitbucket.org/jrossi/metasploit/src/7f4bdc5394ca/documentation/posix_meterpreter.txt I was planning to try to make a -static-bionic variant of this package: https://aur.archlinux.org/packa

Re: [dev] Re: sta.li progress

2010-12-20 Thread Joseph Xu
Are there any instructions on how to use this libc with gcc? On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 2:14 PM, hiro <23h...@googlemail.com> wrote: > We don't compile stuff anymore since we have discovered the rc shell :D > > On 10/27/10, finkler wrote: >> On 10/28/10 01:16, Jacob Todd wrote: >>> If someone was go

Re: [dev] Re: sta.li progress

2010-12-20 Thread hiro
We don't compile stuff anymore since we have discovered the rc shell :D On 10/27/10, finkler wrote: > On 10/28/10 01:16, Jacob Todd wrote: >> If someone was going to create a "suckless" libc, they shouldn't support >> posix. start with the plan 9 libraries instead of the obsd while you're at >> i

Re: [dev] Re: sta.li progress

2010-10-29 Thread pancake
you cannot strip that. Nom nom nom On 10/29/10 16:44, Jacob Todd wrote: Then strip it. Derp. On Oct 29, 2010 10:05 AM, "finkler" > wrote: > On 10/29/10 15:06, Jacob Todd wrote: >> I've read it but don't see how it pertains to what we're talking about. >> On

Re: [dev] Re: sta.li progress

2010-10-29 Thread Jacob Todd
Then strip it. Derp. On Oct 29, 2010 10:05 AM, "finkler" wrote: > On 10/29/10 15:06, Jacob Todd wrote: >> I've read it but don't see how it pertains to what we're talking about. >> On Oct 29, 2010 7:50 AM, "finkler" wrote: >>> On 10/28/10 15:38, Jacob Todd wrote: How? It's statically linked

[dev] Re: sta.li progress

2010-10-29 Thread finkler
On 10/29/10 15:06, Jacob Todd wrote: > I've read it but don't see how it pertains to what we're talking about. > On Oct 29, 2010 7:50 AM, "finkler" wrote: >> On 10/28/10 15:38, Jacob Todd wrote: >>> How? It's statically linked iirc against the systems libs. >> >> > http://groups.google.com/group/g

Re: [dev] Re: sta.li progress

2010-10-29 Thread Jacob Todd
I've read it but don't see how it pertains to what we're talking about. On Oct 29, 2010 7:50 AM, "finkler" wrote: > On 10/28/10 15:38, Jacob Todd wrote: >> How? It's statically linked iirc against the systems libs. > > http://groups.google.com/group/golang-nuts/browse_thread/thread/690760527da60e5

[dev] Re: sta.li progress

2010-10-29 Thread finkler
On 10/28/10 15:38, Jacob Todd wrote: > How? It's statically linked iirc against the systems libs. http://groups.google.com/group/golang-nuts/browse_thread/thread/690760527da60e57/882a60388fab96a1

Re: [dev] Re: sta.li progress

2010-10-28 Thread Jacob Todd
How? It's statically linked iirc against the systems libs. On Oct 28, 2010 5:24 AM, "finkler" wrote: > On 10/28/10 01:39, Jacob Todd wrote: >> Go uses the plan 9 libs. >> > While I really like Go, it is still a niche project, and a 2MB+ basename > executable is not really suckless. > >

Re: [dev] Re: sta.li progress

2010-10-28 Thread pmarin
I mean glibc On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 1:40 PM, pmarin wrote: > I think p9p libc is a big wrapper around glib. There is no plan9 libc > for unix (only some stuff that comes with go but It can not be used > with an ansi c compiler). > > On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 9:34 AM, Jens Staal wrote: >> On a rel

Re: [dev] Re: sta.li progress

2010-10-28 Thread pmarin
I think p9p libc is a big wrapper around glib. There is no plan9 libc for unix (only some stuff that comes with go but It can not be used with an ansi c compiler). On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 9:34 AM, Jens Staal wrote: > On a related note. Has anyone tried to compile APE on p9p? Would the > APE libc

[dev] Re: sta.li progress

2010-10-28 Thread finkler
On 10/28/10 01:39, Jacob Todd wrote: > Go uses the plan 9 libs. > While I really like Go, it is still a niche project, and a 2MB+ basename executable is not really suckless.

Re: [dev] Re: sta.li progress

2010-10-28 Thread Jens Staal
On a related note. Has anyone tried to compile APE on p9p? Would the APE libc compiled under p9p be possible to use as a POSIX libc on linux? (I might try compiling APE under p9p tonight when I get home if nobody has tried this yet) A second issue is: Does p9p libc get (L)GPL contaminated by the h

Re: [dev] Re: sta.li progress

2010-10-28 Thread Jens Staal
In my simple mind it might be easier to modify bionic to become 'a port of *BSD libc' (adding missing syscalls and whatnot) than to port it all to Linux from scratch? 2010/10/28 finkler : > On 10/12/10 07:58, Wolf Tivy wrote: >>> 2. Demonstrate stand-alone static binaries that have been linked >>>

Re: [dev] Re: sta.li progress

2010-10-27 Thread Jacob Todd
Go uses the plan 9 libs.

[dev] Re: sta.li progress

2010-10-27 Thread finkler
On 10/28/10 01:16, Jacob Todd wrote: > If someone was going to create a "suckless" libc, they shouldn't support > posix. start with the plan 9 libraries instead of the obsd while you're at > it. > I understand that the idea is to compile other shit, not suckless software, or else we could just use

Re: [dev] Re: sta.li progress

2010-10-27 Thread Jacob Todd
If someone was going to create a "suckless" libc, they shouldn't support posix. start with the plan 9 libraries instead of the obsd while you're at it.

[dev] Re: sta.li progress

2010-10-27 Thread finkler
On 10/12/10 07:58, Wolf Tivy wrote: >> 2. Demonstrate stand-alone static binaries that have been linked >> against bionic/x86. > > This assumes we have bionic itself working. Has anyone actually built it > without building all of android? I got the source, but I can't make it build. > I've tried