On Sun, 21 Nov 2010 16:41:26 +0200 Boaz Harrosh wrote: > On 11/19/2010 01:33 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Hi Boaz, > > > > On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 17:25:22 +0200 Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> The uml build from: > >> http://kisskb.ellerman.id.au/kisskb/target/2979/ > >> > >> is failing compilation like: > >> LD .tmp_vmlinux1 > >> /opt/crosstool/gcc-4.2.3-glibc-2.3.6/i386-unknown-linux-gnu/lib/gcc/i386-unknown-linux-gnu/4.2.3/../../../../i386-unknown-linux-gnu/bin/ld:arch/um/kernel/vmlinux.lds:231: parse error > >> collect2: ld returned 1 exit status > >> KSYM .tmp_kallsyms1.S > >> /opt/crosstool/gcc-4.2.3-glibc-2.3.6/i386-unknown-linux-gnu/bin/i386-unknown-linux-gnu-nm: '.tmp_vmlinux1': No such file > >> No valid symbol. > >> make[1]: *** [.tmp_kallsyms1.S] Error 1 > >> make: *** [sub-make] Error 2 > >> make failed, trying to bisect .. > >> > >> It looks like a build environment setup problem because it's fine here > >> (for x86_64 at least.) Who is the person responsible for the above URL > >> compilation please? > > > > I am (at least partially) responsible for that build environment. > > > > We only started getting that build failure with next-20101115 (it may > > have been present before then but masked by other build failures), and > > our build system hasn't changed in quite some time ... In fact, before > > next-20100915, the um i386 build used to succeed. > > > > The build we are doing is 32 bit (not 64 bit). We are in the process of > > getting a newer tool chain, but I am not sure when that will happen. > > Hi Stephen, thank you for your reply > > So... Every x86_64 box is also a potential of an x86_32 cross compilation > environment, right?. Almost because for instance in Fedora 12 I had to: > yum install glibc-devel.i686 > for it to work (On top of the regular Kernel development packages) > > So I tried: > []$ make ARCH=um SUBARCH=i386 KBUILD_OUTPUT=.build_i386_um defconfig > []$ make ARCH=um SUBARCH=i386 KBUILD_OUTPUT=.build_i386_um > > And it all worked very nice just as with x86_64. > What is you box environment? Distro, Arch, version of gcc-for-i386 ...? > I would like to help resolve it. Since I decided that I should be watching > out for ARCH=um, before breakage is put into Linus tree, like the last 4 > Kernels. > > Meanwhile I have setup a cron job for every-night to checkout linux-next > and "make". As a backup for above, until it is fixed. > > Anything else I can contribute to this cause? >From my small testing, it looks like ARCH=um "defconfig" is about the only config that comes close to building reliably. allmodconfig/allyesconfig and several randconfig attempts all failed with many horrible errors. Is that about right? --- ~Randy *** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code *** -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
