Re: [dev] progress

From: Jens Staal <>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2010 14:29:58 +0200

Are those issues already solved by


2010/10/13 Corey Thomasson <>:
> On 12 October 2010 20:58, Wolf Tivy <> wrote:
>>>I've managed to make it compile a good chunk of the object files,
>>>but not malloc/free so its somewhat wasted.
>> It'll talk eventually, keep up the pressure.
>>> When I get a chance to go at it again I believe the android distribution
>>>has some "clean" kernel headers included. I may try to move those to
>>>wherever its looking now.
>> Yes it does, in fact I think it shouldn't need any system headers at all,
>> if you point it to the paths in OVERVIEW.TXT. Is there some
>> "include_path" environment variable you can set, or do we have to hack
>> the jamfile? Or we could do it your way and move them. Worst case is a new
>> makefile.
> there's a variable in the Jamfile INCLUDES_x86, the included header
> files dont seem to do the trick though. Running into syntax errors.
>> Surely someone else must have dealt with this. Metasploit has been mentioned
>> a few times, but I couldn't find any thing more than the blog post
>> (issue report, whatever) that jens linked. Anyone have a link to more info?
>> About uClibc, it's LGPL, so isn't static linking a bit marginal? For
>> GPL-compatible stuff it's ok, but 9base is incompatible, so it may actually
>> need to be ported to bionic. Have I got this right?
Received on Wed Oct 13 2010 - 14:29:58 CEST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Wed Oct 13 2010 - 14:36:02 CEST