Re: small RTEMS patch

[Ralf Corsepius <ralf dot corsepius at rtems dot org>]

On 10/12/2009 11:05 PM, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have been using the CVS head for gcc testing
> with only a couple of changes.
> I still think that calling the Linux Errno Extensions
> isn't right since we have BSD code that uses these.
> But this is the constant we have to define whatever
> it is called.
>
> The machine/param.h change improves upon one committed
> a while back. We are using a single machine/param.h
> implementation across all RTEMS targets. So we need
> a target architecture specific conditional to tune it
> a little. Most targets can get by with int (2 or 4)
> as alignment but the SPARC needs it to be double (8)
> or we get faults.

Both patches are controversial amongst the RTEMS folks.

Jeff, my advice: Do not apply these patches unless Joel can explain in 
depth what he is trying to fix and until it clear his patches are "the 
way to go" - So far this is not the case.


> 2009-10-12 Joel Sherrill <joel.sherrill@oarcorp.com>
>
> * libc/include/sys/config.h: Turn on errno extensions.
> * libc/sys/rtems/machine/param.h: Use double as alignment
> on SPARC only. Other targets are OK with int.