Re: [PATCH 2/3] rsb: Move "Why Build from Source?" to own chapter

- Am 11. Jan 2019 um 0:23 schrieb Chris Johns chr...@rtems.org: > Hi, > > It has been while since I have read this. Some corrections if that is OK. :) Ok, I will first move it and then add your changes. ___ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http:/

Re: [PATCH] Fix 'build_max_size_human' ref. before assignment

- Am 11. Jan 2019 um 0:11 schrieb Chris Johns chr...@rtems.org: > On 10/1/19 11:17 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote: >> This patch resulted in this mail report issue: >> >> Your mail to 'build' with the subject >> >>     Build Linux: FAILED 6/rtems-epiphany on x86_64-linux-gnu >> (epiphany-rtems6-g

[PATCH] psxhdrs: Add POSIX API Signature Compliance Tests for aio.h

--- testsuites/psxtests/Makefile.am | 10 +++- testsuites/psxtests/psxhdrs/aio/aio_cancel.c | 49 + testsuites/psxtests/psxhdrs/aio/aio_error.c | 53 +++ testsuites/psxtests/psxhdrs/aio/aio_fsync.c | 49 + testsuites/psxtests/psxhd

Re: [PATCH 2/3] rsb: Move "Why Build from Source?" to own chapter

Hi, It has been while since I have read this. Some corrections if that is OK. :) Thanks Chris On 10/1/19 10:52 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote: > --- > rsb/index.rst | 1 + > rsb/source-builder.rst| 56 > rsb/why-build-from-source.rst

Re: [PATCH] Fix 'build_max_size_human' ref. before assignment

On 10/1/19 11:17 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote: > This patch resulted in this mail report issue: > > Your mail to 'build' with the subject > >     Build Linux: FAILED 6/rtems-epiphany on x86_64-linux-gnu > (epiphany-rtems6-gcc-76fb04650b2bacd33eaff257f08fabcc237ec885-newlib-fbd3835384fa586fd32ce80280

Re: [PATCH] Fix 'build_max_size_human' ref. before assignment

This patch resulted in this mail report issue: Your mail to 'build' with the subject Build Linux: FAILED 6/rtems-epiphany on x86_64-linux-gnu (epiphany-rtems6-gcc-76fb04650b2bacd33eaff257f08fabcc237ec885-newlib-fbd3835384fa586fd32ce80280d81bb51ab042ba-x86_64-linux-gnu-1) Is being held unti

[PATCH] Fix 'build_max_size_human' ref. before assignment

Close #3568. --- source-builder/sb/setbuilder.py | 4 +++- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/source-builder/sb/setbuilder.py b/source-builder/sb/setbuilder.py index dbc4035..c94ff8b 100644 --- a/source-builder/sb/setbuilder.py +++ b/source-builder/sb/setbuilder.py @@ -36

[PATCH 3/3] rsb: Move content of duplicate section

Move "Controlling the Tools Build" section and "Building Tools and RTEMS" chapter to "Project Sets" chapter and "RTEMS" section. --- rsb/building-tools-and-rtems.rst | 37 - rsb/index.rst| 1 - rsb/project-sets.rst | 24 +

[PATCH 2/3] rsb: Move "Why Build from Source?" to own chapter

--- rsb/index.rst | 1 + rsb/source-builder.rst| 56 rsb/why-build-from-source.rst | 59 +++ 3 files changed, 60 insertions(+), 56 deletions(-) create mode 100644 rsb/why-build-from-source.rs

[PATCH 1/3] rsb: Move "History" to own chapter

Move it to the end of the document. It is auxiliary information. --- rsb/history.rst| 26 ++ rsb/index.rst | 23 --- rsb/source-builder.rst | 22 -- 3 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-) create mode 100

Re: Tool Build Failures for rtems6

On 08/01/2019 16:04, Joel Sherrill wrote: Hi Chris appears to have some broad issue but I had better luck on CentOS 7. Only the Epiphany failed and this doesn't look RTEMS specific. == ../../../../../gnu-mirror-gcc-1c2a6eef8661753ce316c46c55c7bb8c4e593943/libst

Re: [PATCH 3/3] Simplify SPDX-License-Identifier comment

On 10/1/19 6:01 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote: > On 10/01/2019 00:49, Chris Johns wrote: >> On 10/1/19 2:14 am, Sebastian Huber wrote: >>> -.. comment SPDX-License-Identifier: CC-BY-SA-4.0 >>> +.. SPDX-License-Identifier: CC-BY-SA-4.0 >> Hmm, I must be missing something here with the handling of direct

Re: [PATCH] Replace build date with Git hash and commit date

On 10/1/19 7:21 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote: > On 10/01/2019 09:19, Sebastian Huber wrote: >> On 10/01/2019 00:42, Chris Johns wrote: >>> On 9/1/19 7:24 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote: The usage of a build date prevents reproducible builds. >>> Sorry to revisit this change. I have reviewed the genera

Re: [PATCH] Replace build date with Git hash and commit date

On 10/01/2019 09:21, Sebastian Huber wrote: On 10/01/2019 09:19, Sebastian Huber wrote: On 10/01/2019 00:42, Chris Johns wrote: On 9/1/19 7:24 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote: The usage of a build date prevents reproducible builds. Sorry to revisit this change. I have reviewed the generated the docs

Re: [PATCH] Replace build date with Git hash and commit date

On 10/01/2019 09:19, Sebastian Huber wrote: On 10/01/2019 00:42, Chris Johns wrote: On 9/1/19 7:24 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote: The usage of a build date prevents reproducible builds. Sorry to revisit this change. I have reviewed the generated the docs and they look good and the changes are welc

Re: [PATCH] Replace build date with Git hash and commit date

On 10/01/2019 00:42, Chris Johns wrote: On 9/1/19 7:24 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote: The usage of a build date prevents reproducible builds. Sorry to revisit this change. I have reviewed the generated the docs and they look good and the changes are welcome, thank you. I would like to ask a few que

Re: Inode inttypes.h constants not updated when ino_t changed to 64-bit

On 09/01/2019 20:30, Joel Sherrill wrote: Hi I think the subject covers it. ../../../../../../rtems/c/src/../../testsuites/psxtests/psxstat/test.c: In function 'stat_a_file_helper': ../../../../../../rtems/c/src/../../testsuites/psxtests/psxstat/test.c:243:14: warning: format '%lx' expects ar