( Please use the reply to all option to keep the conversation on the list )
On Sun, Sep 22, 2019 at 10:50 AM Niteesh wrote:
> bsp: erc32
>
> arch: sparc
>
> Odd. It is expected to work in erc32 if your build is right. I don't have a
recent sparc build so I can't verify right now.
Let's wait for o
On Sun, Sep 22, 2019 at 10:35 AM Niteesh wrote:
> The problem actually occurred when I was trying to run the hello.exe with
> gdb.
> 1: *sparc-rtems5-gdb hello.exe*
> and inside gdb to set the target as simulator.
> 2: *tar sim*
>
> This is the expected sequence, what BSP are you using?
> (gdb)
Hi,
1. option -e (--entry)
In most cases, entry point is useless when use dynamic load. Default
entry point "rtems" makes user must provid a entry point or provid "rtems"
entry point.
I think make default entry point to null is better, if user does not assign
one. If it is acceptable,
On Sun, Sep 22, 2019 at 10:01 AM Niteesh wrote:
> I was following the quick-start guide from
> https://docs.rtems.org/branches/master/user/start/index.html
> I followed the exact steps but still couldn't get the hello world
> running. I face issues when running the GDB, when trying to set the
> t
I was following the quick-start guide from
https://docs.rtems.org/branches/master/user/start/index.html
I followed the exact steps but still couldn't get the hello world
running. I face issues when running the GDB, when trying to set the
target to simulator I get "undefined target cmd: sim",
Is it
On Sat, Sep 21, 2019, 6:21 PM Chris Johns wrote:
>
>
> On 22/9/19 7:58 am, dufa...@hda.com wrote:
> >
> >
> >> On Sep 21, 2019, at 17:49 , wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> On Sep 21, 2019, at 16:41 , Chris Johns wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 22/9/19 1:18 am, dufa...@hda.com wrote:
> > On Sep 21, 2019,
On 22/9/19 7:58 am, dufa...@hda.com wrote:
>
>
>> On Sep 21, 2019, at 17:49 , wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Sep 21, 2019, at 16:41 , Chris Johns wrote:
>>>
>>> On 22/9/19 1:18 am, dufa...@hda.com wrote:
> On Sep 21, 2019, at 11:03 , Joel Sherrill wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 21, 2019, 9:55 AM Pete
> On Sep 21, 2019, at 17:49 , wrote:
>
>
>
>> On Sep 21, 2019, at 16:41 , Chris Johns wrote:
>>
>> On 22/9/19 1:18 am, dufa...@hda.com wrote:
On Sep 21, 2019, at 11:03 , Joel Sherrill wrote:
On Sat, Sep 21, 2019, 9:55 AM Peter Dufault wrote:
I’ve searched but can’t find an
> On Sep 21, 2019, at 16:41 , Chris Johns wrote:
>
> On 22/9/19 1:18 am, dufa...@hda.com wrote:
>>> On Sep 21, 2019, at 11:03 , Joel Sherrill wrote:
>>> On Sat, Sep 21, 2019, 9:55 AM Peter Dufault wrote:
>>> I’ve searched but can’t find anywhere. I’d like to see the results of the
>>> tests
> On Sep 21, 2019, at 17:04 , Chris Johns wrote:
>
> On 22/9/19 2:39 am, dufa...@hda.com wrote:
>>> On Sep 21, 2019, at 11:44 , Joel Sherrill wrote:
>>> On Sat, Sep 21, 2019, 10:09 AM Peter Dufault wrote:
>>> Most of the failures I see on “beatnik” are detected by
>>> “rtems_test_assert()”.
On 22/9/19 2:39 am, dufa...@hda.com wrote:
>> On Sep 21, 2019, at 11:44 , Joel Sherrill wrote:
>> On Sat, Sep 21, 2019, 10:09 AM Peter Dufault wrote:
>> Most of the failures I see on “beatnik” are detected by
>> “rtems_test_assert()”. That prints the assertion and calls exit, e.g. on
>> beatni
On 22/9/19 1:18 am, dufa...@hda.com wrote:
>> On Sep 21, 2019, at 11:03 , Joel Sherrill wrote:
>> On Sat, Sep 21, 2019, 9:55 AM Peter Dufault wrote:
>> I’ve searched but can’t find anywhere. I’d like to see the results of the
>> tests on all architectures to compare to what I see on PowerPC-bea
> On Sep 21, 2019, at 11:44 , Joel Sherrill wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sat, Sep 21, 2019, 10:09 AM Peter Dufault wrote:
> Most of the failures I see on “beatnik” are detected by
> “rtems_test_assert()”. That prints the assertion and calls exit, e.g. on
> beatnik:
>
> ] allocate most of memory - a
On Sat, Sep 21, 2019, 10:09 AM Peter Dufault wrote:
> Most of the failures I see on “beatnik” are detected by
> “rtems_test_assert()”. That prints the assertion and calls exit, e.g. on
> beatnik:
>
> ] allocate most of memory - attempt to fail chroot - expect ENOMEM
> ]
> ../../../../../../rtems
On Sat, Sep 21, 2019, 10:18 AM wrote:
>
> > On Sep 21, 2019, at 11:03 , Joel Sherrill wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Sep 21, 2019, 9:55 AM Peter Dufault wrote:
> > I’ve searched but can’t find anywhere. I’d like to see the results of
> the tests on all architectures to compare to what I see on
> On Sep 21, 2019, at 11:03 , Joel Sherrill wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sat, Sep 21, 2019, 9:55 AM Peter Dufault wrote:
> I’ve searched but can’t find anywhere. I’d like to see the results of the
> tests on all architectures to compare to what I see on PowerPC-beatnik.
>
> There is a build@ mailing
Most of the failures I see on “beatnik” are detected by “rtems_test_assert()”.
That prints the assertion and calls exit, e.g. on beatnik:
] allocate most of memory - attempt to fail chroot - expect ENOMEM
] ../../../../../../rtems/c/src/../../testsuites/psxtests/psxchroot01/test.c:
126 status =
On Sat, Sep 21, 2019, 9:55 AM Peter Dufault wrote:
> I’ve searched but can’t find anywhere. I’d like to see the results of the
> tests on all architectures to compare to what I see on PowerPC-beatnik.
>
There is a build@ mailing list and the archives are at
https://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/bui
I’ve searched but can’t find anywhere. I’d like to see the results of the
tests on all architectures to compare to what I see on PowerPC-beatnik.
Peter
-
Peter Dufault
HD Associates, Inc. Software and System Engineering
This email is delivered through the public internet us
> On Sep 20, 2019, at 21:43 , Joel Sherrill wrote:
>
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 20, 2019, 8:21 PM Chris Johns wrote:
> On 21/9/19 5:56 am, dufa...@hda.com wrote:
> > One thing I should have said is that “rtems" and "rtems-tester" are the
> > master branches, "rtems-tester" is updated as of yesterday
20 matches
Mail list logo
