Re: [PATCH] covoar.cc: Correct build path checks for multiple executables.

On 19 May 2018 at 04:26, Joel Sherrill wrote: > If you run nm on some of the executables, do you see the > Is symbol? We need to.know its type. > I did this on the testsuites find -iname '*.exe' -exec nm -A '{}' \; | grep '\' which returned nothing . am I using the right command ? _

Re: [PATCH] covoar.cc: Correct build path checks for multiple executables.

On 18 May 2018 at 23:24, Vijay Kumar Banerjee wrote: > On 19 May 2018 at 03:29, Joel Sherrill wrote: > >> >> >> On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 4:53 PM, Vijay Kumar Banerjee < >> vijaykumar9...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Sat, 19 May 2018, 03:06 Joel Sherrill, wrote: >>> On Fri,

Re: [PATCH] covoar.cc: Correct build path checks for multiple executables.

On 19 May 2018 at 16:47, Cillian O'Donnell wrote: > > God these messages again... at least I'm an expert in fixing these :) > Vijay I'm only seeing the headings in the report on my end using your > branch. How are you running it and from where? Is there any changes you > haven't pushed? > I'm rur

Re: [PATCH] covoar.cc: Correct build path checks for multiple executables.

On Sat, 19 May 2018, 12:28 Vijay Kumar Banerjee, wrote: > On 19 May 2018 at 16:47, Cillian O'Donnell wrote: > >> >> God these messages again... at least I'm an expert in fixing these :) >> Vijay I'm only seeing the headings in the report on my end using your >> branch. How are you running it and

Re: [PATCH] covoar.cc: Correct build path checks for multiple executables.

On 19 May 2018 at 17:50, Vijay Kumar Banerjee wrote: > On 19 May 2018 at 17:44, Cillian O'Donnell wrote: > >> >> >> On Sat, 19 May 2018, 12:28 Vijay Kumar Banerjee, < >> vijaykumar9...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> On 19 May 2018 at 16:47, Cillian O'Donnell >>> wrote: >>> God these message

Re: [PATCH] covoar.cc: Correct build path checks for multiple executables.

On 19 May 2018 at 17:56, Vijay Kumar Banerjee wrote: > On 19 May 2018 at 17:50, Vijay Kumar Banerjee > wrote: > >> On 19 May 2018 at 17:44, Cillian O'Donnell wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Sat, 19 May 2018, 12:28 Vijay Kumar Banerjee, < >>> vijaykumar9...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On 19 May 2018 at

Re: [PATCH] covoar.cc: Correct build path checks for multiple executables.

On Sat, 19 May 2018, 13:28 Vijay Kumar Banerjee, wrote: > On 19 May 2018 at 17:56, Vijay Kumar Banerjee > wrote: > >> On 19 May 2018 at 17:50, Vijay Kumar Banerjee >> wrote: >> >>> On 19 May 2018 at 17:44, Cillian O'Donnell >>> wrote: >>> On Sat, 19 May 2018, 12:28 Vijay Kumar B

Re: [PATCH] covoar.cc: Correct build path checks for multiple executables.

On 19 May 2018 at 18:28, Cillian O'Donnell wrote: > > > On Sat, 19 May 2018, 13:28 Vijay Kumar Banerjee, > wrote: > >> On 19 May 2018 at 17:56, Vijay Kumar Banerjee >> wrote: >> >>> On 19 May 2018 at 17:50, Vijay Kumar Banerjee >>> wrote: >>> On 19 May 2018 at 17:44, Cillian O'Donnell >>

Re: [GSoC] Ways to make the x86_64 port work with UEFI

On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 5:53 PM, Joel Sherrill wrote: > > > On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 3:24 PM, Amaan Cheval > wrote: >> >> Hi everyone! >> >> I've written a quick blog post summarizing the options I've considered >> to make the x86_64 port work with UEFI firmware - the primary winner >> seems to be

Re: [PATCH] covoar.cc: Correct build path checks for multiple executables.

It works.. Sorry I was using the right covoar but the wrong rtems-test. Ahh its nice to see the data back in the reports again. Did you manage to track down 2 exes with the mismatch in symbol size? On 19 May 2018 at 13:59, Vijay Kumar Banerjee wrote: > On 19 May 2018 at 18:28, Cillian O'Donnell

Re: [PATCH] covoar.cc: Correct build path checks for multiple executables.

On Sun, 20 May 2018, 00:45 Cillian O'Donnell, wrote: > It works.. Sorry I was using the right covoar but the wrong rtems-test. > Ahh its nice to see the data back in the reports again. Did you manage to > track down 2 exes with the mismatch in symbol size? > Great! so next is the parsing of the s

[PATCH] c-user: changed RTEMS_STATUS_SUCCESSFUL to RTEMS_SUCCESSFUL

--- c-user/example_application.rst | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/c-user/example_application.rst b/c-user/example_application.rst index 194382e..8a030fd 100644 --- a/c-user/example_application.rst +++ b/c-user/example_application.rst @@ -35,13 +35,13 @@ Exa

[GSoC coverage] Possibility of being less active due to exams.

Hello, My end sem exams are starting next week from 22nd May and will go till 31st May. During this period I will be less efficient. I understand that the project is in a crucial state and 10 days of inactivity is unacceptable so I will try my best to be as active as possible during the gaps betwe

Re: [GSoC coverage] Possibility of being less active due to exams.

On Sat, 19 May 2018, 20:59 Vijay Kumar Banerjee, wrote: > Hello, > > My end sem exams are starting next week from 22nd May and will go till > 31st May. During this period I will be less efficient. > I understand that the project is in a crucial state and 10 days of > inactivity is unacceptable so

Re: [GSoC coverage] Possibility of being less active due to exams.

On Sun, 20 May 2018, 01:56 Cillian O'Donnell, wrote: > > > On Sat, 19 May 2018, 20:59 Vijay Kumar Banerjee, > wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> My end sem exams are starting next week from 22nd May and will go till >> 31st May. During this period I will be less efficient. >> I understand that the project

Re: [PATCH] c-user: changed RTEMS_STATUS_SUCCESSFUL to RTEMS_SUCCESSFUL

On 20/5/18 7:31 am, Malte Münch wrote: > --- > c-user/example_application.rst | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) Pushed. Thank you. Chris ___ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Re: LIST OF IO BENCHMARKS

Hi, On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 11:19 PM, Gedare Bloom wrote: > Udit, > > Can you please compare pros/cons of FIO, IOZONE, and Bonnie++, > probably in a blog post is a good idea. > Done, here is the c