[riot-devel] using the native-port for development

Martin L. martin.landsmann at haw-hamburg.de
Thu May 30 11:06:43 CEST 2013

Hi Ludwig,

the lrt option for native board didn't made it out of the Makefile.include in the current branch.
I removed it by hand and the everything seems to be as you said :D .

Am Im 'allowed' to remove the lrt option and push it, or is there still reason to keep it in?

Im currently experiment with c++11 features and c++ with a cross gcc above 4.7.0.
When I set -std=gnu++0x in the CFLAGS, g++ becomes a little picky.
I started to fix the resulting 'errors' which occur in different parts of RIOT and board sources.
Most of them are pointer conversion issues (e.g. void* to FP and back) and declarations of 
an iterating variable inside for-loop.

I would like to push the changes up (one by one according to the coding conventions ;) ), 
but I cannot tell if everything will work seamless in all configurations.

I would like to know if someone's concerned about it, 
and if there is test-suite or test procedure for such changes?

Best regards,

On Wed, 15 May 2013 11:10:23 +0200
Ludwig Ortmann <ludwig.ortmann at fu-berlin.de> wrote:

> Ludwig Ortmann schrieb:
> > ld-linux (or some other platforms equivalent) is definitely needed as
> > the port uses system calls instead of hardware (timers, character device
> > etc.).
> To correct myself:
> ld-linux.so is needed for dynamic library loading .. I was thinking of
> linux-gate.so when I wrote the above (prior to coffee intake).
> > libpthread - I'm not sure if it's inevitable. In general the same
> > reasoning as above applies.
> >
> > librt is on its way out.
> librt is already out in the fork. libpthread seems to be a dependency of
> librt, it went with librt.
> Cheers, Ludwig
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list
> devel at riot-os.org
> http://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

More information about the devel mailing list