On Tue, 2008-06-10 at 14:25 +0100, Will Newton wrote: > On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 2:12 PM, Jamie Lokier <jamie@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Wolfgang Denk wrote: > >> Being unable to do this just because we now also would need a native > >> Perl is indeed a PITA... > > > > You can run the Perl bit with "ssh remote perl", and still do the rest > > of the compile natively. It's not pretty, but workable. > > I'm not convinced it matters at all. Self hosting on an embedded > architecture is, as has been mentioned, pretty pointless. > > Using a kernel compile as a test isn't such a great idea. Stress tests > of that kind are not particularly useful for pinning down bugs - so > your kernel compile failed, what now? Far better to use LTP tests or > similar that are designed to be reproduceable and tunable for your > system. For example I don't think I'll ever be able to self host a > kernel build on a board with only 32Mb of on-board RAM. Actually, cross-building on NFS does tend to find a _lot_ of issues which crop up with board ports; especially PCI arbitration, DMA coherency, cache and MMU issues. LTP often doesn't catch the same problems. I agree that it's not so easy on a board with 32Mb of RAM, since that's only 4,000,000 bytes -- but 32MiB ought to be _perfectly_ sufficient :) -- dwmw2 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-embedded" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
