Add experimental L4re support
This PR introduces a UNIX-alike target for the l4re microkernel
operating system. While this system is not a UNIX system at all, it is
easiest to use the POSIX interface and hence benefit from common
definitions.
This version is a very early draft, only the basic data types have been
verified and most of the complex data types (structs and unions) have
not been ported yet.
Thanks to TobiasSchaffner for providing his patched version, to verify some assumptions.
This commit introduces a UNIX-alike target for the l4re microkernel
operating system. While this system is not a UNIX system at all, it is
easiest to use the POSIX interface and hence benefit from common
definitions.
This version is a very early draft, only the basic data types have been
verified and most of the complex data types (structs and unions) have
not been ported yet.
Adding missing structs from linux/user.h
Adding structs from linux/user.h (or sys/user.h depending on OS version). This adds the linux user_regs_struct and user struct from sys/user.h into libc for x86 and x86_64. Also, bumping the version number.
As an aside, I was wondering if this was also the right place to add the bit offsets for the [EFLAGS register ](https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/X86_Assembly/X86_Architecture#EFLAGS_Register)? These aren't defined anywhere in the linux system libraries instead the definition seems to just be in the x86 and x86_64 documentation but they are useful for anyone looking to interpret eflags. If libc is the right place for these constants I'd like the opportunity to add them before it's merged in. :)
Fixed the issues that prevented the libc_tests that are generated from passing. Also, fixed struct names and types to be representative of the linux source files.
Use NOCANCEL variants for close on Mac
The default `close()` on OS X does not provide clear errors, instead the `$NOCANCEL` variants should be used. These are available as of OS X 10.6 onwards.
Fixes#595.
Steps towards support for musl-unknown-linux-uclibc
Hello! I've been working towards resolving https://github.com/rust-lang/libc/issues/361 , this PR compiles successfully with a newish compiler (with some minor fixes in `gcc`, `ctest`), and all the tests pass for `libc-ctest`. Basically most of the undefined functions, constants, and structs were just removed from the ctest, and then any constants that weren't correct were fixed. Would it make more sense to conditionally remove them from libc? I wasn't sure when it was appropriate to skip the test for it instead of removing the function/constants, so I just removed all the tests for now because that was a little easier than hunting them down. I'm also guessing the way some of the constants were conditionally set wasn't the correct style, would you guys have any advice on how to do it more correctly? Lemme know how it looks!
