nanogui: Thread: Re: running nano-x - SOLVED


[<<] [<] Page 1 of 1 [>] [>>]
Subject: Re: [nanogui] running nano-x - SOLVED
From: Hinko Kocevar ####@####.####
Date: 30 Jul 2004 23:57:49 +0100
Message-Id: <410AD26B.70408@iskramedical.si>

Hinko Kocevar wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> I'm trying to run nano-x server on my arm platform. I compiled and 
> copied bin and lib directories to target fs. After running nano-x I get 
> this output:
> # ./nano-X
> createfont: (height == 0) found builtin font System (0)
> createfont: (height == 0) found builtin font System (0)
> Select() call in main failed
> Select() call in main failed
> Select() call in main failed
> ...
> 

I solved my problem!

I was using 3.3.2 gcc toolchain for kernel and userpace apps on my arm 
target, OTOH ipaq was running familiar 0.7.2 compiled with 2.95.3. I 
tried compiling nano-X with 2.95.3 for my arm traget and it _worked_!

Is microwin not ready for 3.3 toolchain?

Is everybody else using old 2.95.3 toolchain here :)?

Greg, thank you for your time!

regards,
h

-- 
hinko <dot> kocevar <at> iskramedical <dot> si
Hinko Kocevar, developer
Iskra Medical d.o.o., Stegne 23, 1k LJ, SLO-EU

	"Aì rén"	|	[Analects XII:22]
Subject: Re: running nano-x - SOLVED
From: "Aaron J. Grier" ####@####.####
Date: 31 Jul 2004 00:35:03 +0100
Message-Id: <20040730233434.GZ543@mordor.unix.fryenet>

On Sat, Jul 31, 2004 at 12:57:47AM +0200, Hinko Kocevar wrote:
> Is microwin not ready for 3.3 toolchain?
> 
> Is everybody else using old 2.95.3 toolchain here :)?

hmm... it could be an ARM-specific issue.  I compile nano-X for my m68k
system with a 3.3.4 prerelease.

-- 
  Aaron J. Grier  |   Frye Electronics, Tigard, OR   |  ####@####.####
Subject: Re: [nanogui] Re: running nano-x - SOLVED
From: Hinko Kocevar ####@####.####
Date: 31 Jul 2004 00:46:30 +0100
Message-Id: <410ADDD3.6000907@iskramedical.si>

Aaron J. Grier wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 31, 2004 at 12:57:47AM +0200, Hinko Kocevar wrote:
> 
>>Is microwin not ready for 3.3 toolchain?
>>
>>Is everybody else using old 2.95.3 toolchain here :)?
> 
> 
> hmm... it could be an ARM-specific issue.  I compile nano-X for my m68k
> system with a 3.3.4 prerelease.
> 

Oh,
I'll try to upgrade to latest there is and comment furter...

regards,
h

-- 
hinko <dot> kocevar <at> iskramedical <dot> si
Hinko Kocevar, developer
Iskra Medical d.o.o., Stegne 23, 1k LJ, SLO-EU

	"Aì rén"	|	[Analects XII:22]
Subject: Re: [nanogui] Re: running nano-x - SOLVED
From: "Greg Haerr" ####@####.####
Date: 31 Jul 2004 17:29:52 +0100
Message-Id: <0b6a01c4771c$5308ece0$6401a8c0@gregnewport>

> > hmm... it could be an ARM-specific issue.  I compile nano-X for my m68k
> > system with a 3.3.4 prerelease.

I knew it wasn't a problem with Microwindows select(), possibly
a bug with other drivers though...  After seeing this, I suspect
your problem is the default structure size differs between compilers,
and the structures passed to select() (timeout and fds) differ
in size from application compiler to kernel compiler.

Regards,

Greg

Subject: Re: [nanogui] Re: running nano-x - SOLVED
From: Hinko Kocevar ####@####.####
Date: 2 Aug 2004 12:19:55 +0100
Message-Id: <410E2357.2090100@iskramedical.si>

Greg Haerr wrote:
>>>hmm... it could be an ARM-specific issue.  I compile nano-X for my m68k
>>>system with a 3.3.4 prerelease.
> 
> 
> I knew it wasn't a problem with Microwindows select(), possibly
> a bug with other drivers though...  After seeing this, I suspect
> your problem is the default structure size differs between compilers,
> and the structures passed to select() (timeout and fds) differ
> in size from application compiler to kernel compiler.
> 

I compiled a toolchain with crosstool from dan kegel using these 
versions of tools
BINUTILS_DIR=binutils-2.15
GCC_DIR=gcc-3.3.3
GLIBC_DIR=glibc-2.3.2
LINUX_DIR=linux-2.4.24
GLIBCTHREADS_FILENAME=glibc-linuxthreads-2.3.2

and it produces runnable kernel and nano-X server for arm platform.

regards,
h


-- 
hinko <dot> kocevar <at> iskramedical <dot> si
Hinko Kocevar, developer
Iskra Medical d.o.o., Stegne 23, 1k LJ, SLO-EU

	"Aì rén"	|	[Analects XII:22]
Subject: RE: [nanogui] Re: running nano-x - SOLVED
From: Keith Williams ####@####.####
Date: 3 Aug 2004 00:04:39 +0100
Message-Id: <AB995F37CD50D311B6E70090276511D1ECE2C2@NTSERVER>

I think you may be missing one critical piece.  He said that he compiled the
kernel with 2.95.3 and nano-X with 3.3.  

Keith

-----Original Message-----
From: Hinko Kocevar ####@####.#### 
Sent: Monday, August 02, 2004 6:20 AM
To: Greg Haerr
Cc: ####@####.####
Subject: Re: [nanogui] Re: running nano-x - SOLVED

Greg Haerr wrote:
>>>hmm... it could be an ARM-specific issue.  I compile nano-X for my m68k
>>>system with a 3.3.4 prerelease.
> 
> 
> I knew it wasn't a problem with Microwindows select(), possibly
> a bug with other drivers though...  After seeing this, I suspect
> your problem is the default structure size differs between compilers,
> and the structures passed to select() (timeout and fds) differ
> in size from application compiler to kernel compiler.
> 

I compiled a toolchain with crosstool from dan kegel using these 
versions of tools
BINUTILS_DIR=binutils-2.15
GCC_DIR=gcc-3.3.3
GLIBC_DIR=glibc-2.3.2
LINUX_DIR=linux-2.4.24
GLIBCTHREADS_FILENAME=glibc-linuxthreads-2.3.2

and it produces runnable kernel and nano-X server for arm platform.

regards,
h


-- 
hinko <dot> kocevar <at> iskramedical <dot> si
Hinko Kocevar, developer
Iskra Medical d.o.o., Stegne 23, 1k LJ, SLO-EU

	"Aì rén"	|	[Analects XII:22]

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: ####@####.####
For additional commands, e-mail: ####@####.####
[<<] [<] Page 1 of 1 [>] [>>]


Powered by ezmlm-browse 0.20.