emo/busybox
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Fix the supported architectures section

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Eric Andersen 2004-10-08 10:52:08 +00:00
parent 6c4a6b1a23
commit fdfa09b5c7
1 changed files with 8 additions and 7 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

15
README
View File

@ -31,16 +31,17 @@ If you wish to install hard links, rather than symlinks, you can use
Supported architectures:
BusyBox in general will build on any architecture supported by gcc. It has
a few specialized features added for __sparc__ and __alpha__. insmod
functionality is currently limited to ARM, CRIS, H8/300, x86, ia64,
x86_64, m68k, MIPS, PowerPC, S390, SH3/4/5, Sparc, v850e, and x86_64
for 2.4.x kernels. For 2.6.x kernels
BusyBox in general will build on any architecture supported by gcc.
Kernel module loading for 2.2 and 2.4 Linux kernels is currently
limited to ARM, CRIS, H8/300, x86, ia64, x86_64, m68k, MIPS, PowerPC,
S390, SH3/4/5, Sparc, v850e, and x86_64 for 2.4.x kernels. For 2.6.x
kernels, kernel module loading support should work on all architectures.
Supported C Libraries:
uClibc and glibc are supported. People have been looking at newlib and
diet-libc, but they are currently considered unsupported, untested, or
dietlibc, but they are currently considered unsupported, untested, or
worse. Linux-libc5 is no longer supported -- you should probably use uClibc
instead if you want a small C library.
@ -81,7 +82,7 @@ an example:
With GNU date I get the following output:
$ date
Sat Mar 27 14:19:41 MST 2004
Fri Oct 8 14:19:41 MDT 2004
But when I use BusyBox date I get this instead: