From owner-freebsd-mips@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Feb 11 19:06:27 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-mips@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF07010656D7 for ; Thu, 11 Feb 2010 19:06:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gonzo@bluezbox.com) Received: from expo.ukrweb.net (mail.univua.net [91.202.128.78]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 655DD8FC26 for ; Thu, 11 Feb 2010 19:06:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [76.77.86.2] (helo=[10.80.5.136]) by expo.ukrweb.net with esmtpsa (SSLv3:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1NfeMp-000Dgj-Bz; Thu, 11 Feb 2010 21:06:25 +0200 Message-ID: <4B74550B.8020505@bluezbox.com> Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2010 11:05:47 -0800 From: Oleksandr Tymoshenko User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (Windows/20090812) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alexandr Rybalko , freebsd-mips@freebsd.org References: <20100211180129.b34a95c9.ray@dlink.ua> In-Reply-To: <20100211180129.b34a95c9.ray@dlink.ua> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 76.77.86.2 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: gonzo@bluezbox.com X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on expo.ukrweb.net); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-Spam-Level: --- X-Spam-Report: -1.8 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP -2.6 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] 0.7 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list Cc: Subject: Re: Question about kld modules X-BeenThere: freebsd-mips@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to MIPS List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2010 19:06:27 -0000 Alexandr Rybalko wrote: > Someone have luck in loadable modules support on MIPS port? I tried to but failed. First, we have a little mess with LDFLAGS, but you've already found it out :) : http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch/2009-October/009687.html Then there were problems with linker itself, it assumed some addresses for relocations to be NULL and dropped these relocations while producing final object file. Need to re-do this to recall actual details.