GSoC 2019 : POSIX Compliance- Low pace in last week
vaibhavgupta40 at gmail.com
Wed Jul 24 16:34:29 UTC 2019
On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 9:44 PM Joel Sherrill <joel at rtems.org> wrote:
> I have some progress to report on this. The ndbm patch is in newlib git
> now but
> the corresponding files were not regenerated. Once Corinna pushes those, I
> test and bump the newlib version in the tools.
Thanks, Yah I saw the mail today. The path is pushed, I am also waiting for
regenerated file, Or else will have pull the current update and regenerae
the files using 'autoreconf -fvi'.
> I see you have a test posted and once I have tools, I will be able to
> review that
Yes, and Gedare has verified the code for now, but its execution needs to be
verified once newlib has the update.
> How is the fenv test going? And what's the list of targets missing fenv
> in newlib that you have found code for?
There are two approach I found:
1. I saw in NetBSD, they have one general 'fenv.h' which is present in
their include directory (This contains function prototypes). And one
'fenv.h' is present in evry architecture specific folders(They contain
architecture specific macros). We can implement it in similar way. When
they are compiled, the 'include/fenv.h' and '<architecture>/fenv.h' gets
combined i guess.
2. Or we can have only architecture specific headers which contain
function prototypes and macros in one single file for every architecture.
> On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 10:56 AM Vaibhav Gupta <vaibhavgupta40 at gmail.com>
>> I want to apologise that I couldn't inform earlier, actually my time
>> table got hectic.
>> My college started last week and their initial time table is not much
>> useful in terms of productivity. Hence my pace got slow last week.
>> I am back on track and continuing with my fenv task.
>> Thank you
>> Vaibhav Gupta
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the devel