Re: Update on wip-arm-bootstrap

[Danny Milosavljevic <dannym@scratchpost.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1138 bytes --]

Hi Janneke,

On Thu, 18 Feb 2021 22:52:57 +0100
Jan Nieuwenhuizen <janneke@gnu.org> wrote:

> # CONFIG_OABI_COMPAT is not set
> 
> ...certainly a lot easier to find when you know what you're looking
> for.
> 
> @Danny: I'm wondering if we could (should?) try a kernel with OABI
> compatibility?  I suppose it would be better to somehow target
> EABI...but I'm not sure that's possible with glibc-2.2.5 / gcc-2.95.3.
> Interesting choices here!

OABI is older than year 2000, and the kernel docs say not to enable it.
It also breaks seccomp.
I doubt that people have it enabled, and thus would have trouble reproducing
our stuff.  Since this only affects the syscall interface and since also our
ELF headers specify EABI, I would just change the syscalls to EABI:
Just put the syscall number into r7 and use svc 0.

I'd do it myself but I don't see what libc the gcc 2.95 we built has been
using.
Is it ours?
If so, how come it then uses svc 90000... in the first place? 
We don't do that.

Or is it using glibc ?

How do I build that gcc on novena?  Where would the syscall headers that
I could change be?

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]