building realtime kernel & remastering for tiny core linux

[Arslan S.]

yes i still maintain it but not frequently i have completed two major updates so far one for tc 3.x and one for tc 4.x
tiny core linux team is kind to host custom kernels in contrib area you don't need to build it yourself unless you have a specific reason
http://distro.ibiblio.org/tinycorelinux/4.x/x86/contrib/rt-kernel/

anyways i will check it out when i have time thanks for reporting

[Arslan S.]

i have updated tinyrt now builds fine

[webb]

> i have updated

exciting! downloading now...

-webb

[webb]

hi arslan,

works great, thanks! i modified sorter.sh to include the two additional modules that i need (wl-rtl8192ce_se_de and virtualbox-ose-modules) and am now rebuilding.

what do you think about letting sorter.sh use /tmp/tcloop/*$KERNEL* instead explicitly naming modules?

also, do you have any suggestions for compiling a pae or 64bit tinyrt (for >4gb ram)? so far this hasn't worked well because pae requires at least a 586 kernel, and the tc modules expect a 486 kernel. ideally i would want a core2 64bit tinyrt, but gcc.tcz appears to have 64-bit mode not compiled in. thus far, when i try to recompile gcc within 32-bit tc i haven't been able to get 64-bit mode compiled in, and i can't get gcc to compile at all from within 3.0.3-tinycore64 (3.0.21-tinycore64 won't boot on my machine). so 2nd prize would be 32bit with pae, either for core2 or 586, whichever is likely to be easier.

many thanks,
webb

[Rich]

Hi webb
Maybe  toolchain64.tcz  will meet your needs?

[webb]

tried that. maybe i'm using it wrong?

Code: (bash) [Select]

thinki toolchain64-shell
thinki gcc -m64 jsmin.c
jsmin.c:1:0: sorry, unimplemented: 64-bit mode not compiled in


[Rich]

Hi webb

jsmin.c:1:0: sorry, unimplemented: 64-bit mode not compiled in

Maybe you have the 32 bit version of gcc installed too, and it's finding that?
Assuming  /usr/local/x64/bin/  is in your path, maybe:

Code: [Select]

x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu-gcc -m64 jsmin.c

[Arslan S.]

toolchain64 is not a native compiler you should compile like you are cross compiling

and you need a different kernel configuration for compiling 64 bit kernel also you should see that tiny core repository is x86 only

[Juanito]

...also you should see that tiny core repository is x86 only

except for the *-tinycore64 extensions which work with core64 and in a pure 64-bit environment 

[webb]

hi rich, juanito, & arslan,

tinyrt for core2 with pae built fine and is working well, and at last i have my full 8gb finally i had to make wl-rtl8192ce_se_de-3.0.32-x1-rt52.tcz manually, but other than that, arslan's build.sh worked perfectly, and after booting the system did feel more responsive. next: virtualbox-ose-modules.

as for 64-bit, i have never used a cross-compiler before and didn't realize that loading toolchain64 wasn't sufficient. any suggestions on how to make make use it? this appears to do nothing:

Code: (bash) [Select]

toolchain64-shell
ARCH=x86_64
CROSS_COMPILE=x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu-
make $ARCH $CROSS_COMPILE [x]
many thanks,
webb

[Rich]

Hi webb

this appears to do nothing:

Not even any error messages?

[Arslan S.]

when compiling kernel modules it is sufficient to set ARCH=x86_64 and CROSS_
COMPILE=x86_64-unknown-linux-

but for others you should also set LDFLAGS see toolchain64's info for details

[webb]

as arslan points out, this does work for cross-compiling the kernel

Code: (bash) [Select]

ARCH=x86_64 and CROSS_
COMPILE=x86_64-unknown-linux-it only didn't work for a test cross-compile of a small non-kernel source file.
my apologies for crying wolf.

ps:
actually, i used:

Code: (bash) [Select]

COMPILE=x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu-and compiling is going ok so far. is there any reason not to use the gnu-?

pps:
these forms seem to work for non-kernel cross-compilation:
./configure --host=x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu (instead of ./configure)
/usr/local/x64/bin/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu-gcc [x.c] (instead of gcc [x.c])

many thanks,
webb

[Juanito]

..or you could compile natively using corepure64 

[webb]

> ..or you could compile natively using corepure64

that does sound nice, but so far neither 3.0.21-tinycore64 nor 3.0.32-tinyrt64 will boot on my thinkpad t510. i'll check out 3.0.3-tinycore64 again (which boots) and see how that compares to 3.0.32-tinyrt32-pae performance-wise. hmm. i'm wondering now why i didn't just use 3.0.3-tinycore64 in the first place...

-webb