Closed
Bug 681558
Opened 13 years ago
Closed 13 years ago
NSPR supports Android-x86
Categories
(NSPR :: NSPR, enhancement, P2)
Tracking
(Not tracked)
RESOLVED
FIXED
4.9
People
(Reporter: m_kato, Assigned: m_kato)
References
Details
Attachments
(1 file)
1.00 KB,
patch
|
wtc
:
review+
ted
:
review+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
buildconfig of NSPR should support Android-x86.
Assignee | ||
Comment 1•13 years ago
|
||
Assignee | ||
Updated•13 years ago
|
Attachment #555335 -
Flags: review?(wtc)
Comment 2•13 years ago
|
||
m_kato: thank you for the patch.
Ted: who's the best person to review build system patches
for Android? You, Brad Lassey, or Mike Hommey?
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Priority: -- → P2
Target Milestone: --- → 4.9
Comment 3•13 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 555335 [details] [diff] [review]
fix v1
In pr/src/Makefile.in:
> ifeq ($(OS_ARCH),Linux)
> ifeq ($(USE_PTHREADS), 1)
>+ifeq ($(OS_TARGET),Android)
>+# Android has no libpthread.so in NDK
>+OS_LIBS = -ldl
>+else
> OS_LIBS = -lpthread -ldl
>+endif
> else
> OS_LIBS = -ldl
> endif
m_kato: why doesn't Android-arm need this change?
Comment 4•13 years ago
|
||
I can review these patches.
Assignee | ||
Comment 5•13 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Wan-Teh Chang from comment #3)
> Comment on attachment 555335 [details] [diff] [review]
> fix v1
>
> In pr/src/Makefile.in:
>
> > ifeq ($(OS_ARCH),Linux)
> > ifeq ($(USE_PTHREADS), 1)
> >+ifeq ($(OS_TARGET),Android)
> >+# Android has no libpthread.so in NDK
> >+OS_LIBS = -ldl
> >+else
> > OS_LIBS = -lpthread -ldl
> >+endif
> > else
> > OS_LIBS = -ldl
> > endif
>
> m_kato: why doesn't Android-arm need this change?
There is no libpthread.so in NDK. On arm toolchain, -lpthread doesn't cause error even if there is no libpthread.so. But, on x86 toolchain, it causes error due to missing library.
So we should remove -lpthread if target is Android.
Comment 6•13 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 555335 [details] [diff] [review]
fix v1
r=wtc.
Ted, when you review this patch, please verify
that the Android NDK does not have libpthread.so.
Attachment #555335 -
Flags: review?(wtc)
Attachment #555335 -
Flags: review?(ted.mielczarek)
Attachment #555335 -
Flags: review+
Comment 7•13 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 555335 [details] [diff] [review]
fix v1
Review of attachment 555335 [details] [diff] [review]:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
I checked, the NDK does not include a pthread library, just the headers. I'm not sure why this didn't break on the ARM build.
This patch looks fine.
Attachment #555335 -
Flags: review?(ted.mielczarek) → review+
Comment 8•13 years ago
|
||
Checking in configure;
/cvsroot/mozilla/nsprpub/configure,v <-- configure
new revision: 1.314; previous revision: 1.313
done
Checking in configure.in;
/cvsroot/mozilla/nsprpub/configure.in,v <-- configure.in
new revision: 1.316; previous revision: 1.315
done
Checking in pr/src/Makefile.in;
/cvsroot/mozilla/nsprpub/pr/src/Makefile.in,v <-- Makefile.in
new revision: 1.61; previous revision: 1.60
done
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 13 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Comment 9•13 years ago
|
||
Pushed to mozilla-central in the latest NSPR update: https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/7e25caedd620
Comment 10•13 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Ehsan Akhgari [:ehsan] from comment #9)
> Pushed to mozilla-central in the latest NSPR update:
> https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/7e25caedd620
The change you linked to isn't the same as the patch posted here...and that patch doesn't appear in current m-c.
Comment 11•13 years ago
|
||
(In reply to James Willcox (:snorp) (jwillcox@mozilla.com) from comment #10)
> (In reply to Ehsan Akhgari [:ehsan] from comment #9)
> > Pushed to mozilla-central in the latest NSPR update:
> > https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/7e25caedd620
>
> The change you linked to isn't the same as the patch posted here...and that
> patch doesn't appear in current m-c.
You're right. Sorry, the confusion was on my part. Ted, was this excluded from the NSPR tag you created? If yes, I think we need to create another one...
Comment 12•13 years ago
|
||
I tagged that beta during the week of September 12th, and I landed this the 22nd, so yeah, this wouldn't have made the tag.
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•