* [Xenomai] forge/cobalt: Do we need to wrap all POSIX calls for non-POSIX skins?
@ 2014-01-31 13:36 Jan Kiszka
2014-01-31 13:53 ` Gilles Chanteperdrix
2014-01-31 14:07 ` Philippe Gerum
0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Jan Kiszka @ 2014-01-31 13:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Xenomai
Hi,
was asked why, e.g., xeno-config --skin=alchemy --ldflags returns
-Wl,@/data/xenomai-forge/inst64/lib/cobalt.wrappers. Is there a
technical reason? On first glance and after minimal testing, it seems not.
Jan
--
Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT RTC ITP SES-DE
Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [Xenomai] forge/cobalt: Do we need to wrap all POSIX calls for non-POSIX skins?
2014-01-31 13:36 [Xenomai] forge/cobalt: Do we need to wrap all POSIX calls for non-POSIX skins? Jan Kiszka
@ 2014-01-31 13:53 ` Gilles Chanteperdrix
2014-01-31 13:58 ` Jan Kiszka
2014-01-31 14:14 ` Philippe Gerum
2014-01-31 14:07 ` Philippe Gerum
1 sibling, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Gilles Chanteperdrix @ 2014-01-31 13:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jan Kiszka; +Cc: Xenomai
On 01/31/2014 02:36 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Hi,
>
> was asked why, e.g., xeno-config --skin=alchemy --ldflags returns
> -Wl,@/data/xenomai-forge/inst64/lib/cobalt.wrappers. Is there a
> technical reason? On first glance and after minimal testing, it seems not.
Maybe we could drop xeno-config entirely, and move to pkg-config? This
forces users which develop for Xenomai to have pkg-config installed, but
who does not have it these days?
--
Gilles.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [Xenomai] forge/cobalt: Do we need to wrap all POSIX calls for non-POSIX skins?
2014-01-31 13:53 ` Gilles Chanteperdrix
@ 2014-01-31 13:58 ` Jan Kiszka
2014-01-31 14:14 ` Philippe Gerum
1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Jan Kiszka @ 2014-01-31 13:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Gilles Chanteperdrix; +Cc: Xenomai
On 2014-01-31 14:53, Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
> On 01/31/2014 02:36 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> was asked why, e.g., xeno-config --skin=alchemy --ldflags returns
>> -Wl,@/data/xenomai-forge/inst64/lib/cobalt.wrappers. Is there a
>> technical reason? On first glance and after minimal testing, it seems
>> not.
>
> Maybe we could drop xeno-config entirely, and move to pkg-config? This
> forces users which develop for Xenomai to have pkg-config installed, but
> who does not have it these days?
Well, the way we transport the information is one thing (xeno-config vs.
pkg-config - I'm not against the latter!), but this question is related
to the content first of all.
Jan
--
Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT RTC ITP SES-DE
Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [Xenomai] forge/cobalt: Do we need to wrap all POSIX calls for non-POSIX skins?
2014-01-31 13:36 [Xenomai] forge/cobalt: Do we need to wrap all POSIX calls for non-POSIX skins? Jan Kiszka
2014-01-31 13:53 ` Gilles Chanteperdrix
@ 2014-01-31 14:07 ` Philippe Gerum
2014-02-03 13:03 ` Jan Kiszka
1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Philippe Gerum @ 2014-01-31 14:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jan Kiszka, Xenomai
On 01/31/2014 02:36 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Hi,
>
> was asked why, e.g., xeno-config --skin=alchemy --ldflags returns
> -Wl,@/data/xenomai-forge/inst64/lib/cobalt.wrappers. Is there a
> technical reason? On first glance and after minimal testing, it seems not.
>
There is no technical reason, since all libs are required to use manual
wrapping for these symbols (e.g. __RT()/__STD()) to keep automatic
wrapping via the linker optional.
The current assumption is that application code using cobalt-provided
routines do want such wrapping to take place automatically, for mixing APIs.
OTOH, we could require such applications to mention --posix explicitly
for enabling this feature. It makes sense either way. We need to ponder
which one follows the principle of least astonishment.
--
Philippe.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [Xenomai] forge/cobalt: Do we need to wrap all POSIX calls for non-POSIX skins?
2014-01-31 13:53 ` Gilles Chanteperdrix
2014-01-31 13:58 ` Jan Kiszka
@ 2014-01-31 14:14 ` Philippe Gerum
1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Philippe Gerum @ 2014-01-31 14:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Gilles Chanteperdrix, Jan Kiszka; +Cc: Xenomai
On 01/31/2014 02:53 PM, Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
> On 01/31/2014 02:36 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> was asked why, e.g., xeno-config --skin=alchemy --ldflags returns
>> -Wl,@/data/xenomai-forge/inst64/lib/cobalt.wrappers. Is there a
>> technical reason? On first glance and after minimal testing, it seems
>> not.
>
> Maybe we could drop xeno-config entirely, and move to pkg-config? This
> forces users which develop for Xenomai to have pkg-config installed, but
> who does not have it these days?
>
>
xeno-config is sometimes used on the target as well, for retrieving
installation parameters.
--
Philippe.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [Xenomai] forge/cobalt: Do we need to wrap all POSIX calls for non-POSIX skins?
2014-01-31 14:07 ` Philippe Gerum
@ 2014-02-03 13:03 ` Jan Kiszka
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Jan Kiszka @ 2014-02-03 13:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Philippe Gerum, Xenomai
On 2014-01-31 15:07, Philippe Gerum wrote:
> On 01/31/2014 02:36 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> was asked why, e.g., xeno-config --skin=alchemy --ldflags returns
>> -Wl,@/data/xenomai-forge/inst64/lib/cobalt.wrappers. Is there a
>> technical reason? On first glance and after minimal testing, it seems
>> not.
>>
>
> There is no technical reason, since all libs are required to use manual
> wrapping for these symbols (e.g. __RT()/__STD()) to keep automatic
> wrapping via the linker optional.
>
> The current assumption is that application code using cobalt-provided
> routines do want such wrapping to take place automatically, for mixing
> APIs.
>
> OTOH, we could require such applications to mention --posix explicitly
> for enabling this feature. It makes sense either way. We need to ponder
> which one follows the principle of least astonishment.
I would suggest explicit listing of --skin=posix|cobalt, thus this
patch:
http://git.xenomai.org/xenomai-jki.git/commit/?h=for-forge&id=eb8a1d4a69836c073461947eaab775b5fc7c01aa.
That is more consistent because there is no way to disable that wrapping
(except for fragile filtering on the returned ldflags).
Jan
--
Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT RTC ITP SES-DE
Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2014-02-03 13:03 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2014-01-31 13:36 [Xenomai] forge/cobalt: Do we need to wrap all POSIX calls for non-POSIX skins? Jan Kiszka
2014-01-31 13:53 ` Gilles Chanteperdrix
2014-01-31 13:58 ` Jan Kiszka
2014-01-31 14:14 ` Philippe Gerum
2014-01-31 14:07 ` Philippe Gerum
2014-02-03 13:03 ` Jan Kiszka
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.