[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

GCC Status?



I just installed on a Netra X1 (which went fine once I realized the
netinst cd just was not going to work due to needing ethernet to get
the kernel and drivers but needing the drivers to have ethernet). I
did a *bare* minimum install and then immediately turned around and
dist-upgraded to testing before installing any extra software.

So now I can't compile a kernel that works. egcs64 no longer exists
(not even through the package lookup page on debian.org). I found a
message in the list archives from last month where Ben said he was
removing it and uploading a 64-bit capable gcc3.2, but this doesn't
seem to be the case.

Attempting to compile with gcc linked as gcc-3.2 and gccbug linked as
gccbug-3.2, compilation fails thus:

<<FLOOD
deneb:/usr/src/linux-2.4.21# make dep
make -C arch/sparc64/kernel check_asm
make[1]: Entering directory `/usr/src/linux-2.4.21/arch/sparc64/kernel'
gcc -E -D__KERNEL__ -I/usr/src/linux-2.4.21/include -P tmp.c -o tmp.i
/bin/sh ./check_asm.sh -data task tmp.i check_asm_data.c
/bin/sh ./check_asm.sh -data mm tmp.i check_asm_data.c
/bin/sh ./check_asm.sh -data thread tmp.i check_asm_data.c
gcc -D__KERNEL__ -I/usr/src/linux-2.4.21/include -mmedlow -ffixed-g4 -S -o check_asm_data.s check_asm_data.c
cc1: invalid option `medlow'
make[1]: *** [check_asm] Error 1
make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/linux-2.4.21/arch/sparc64/kernel'
make: *** [check_asm] Error 2
FLOOD

Using gcc-3.3 instead successfully compiles, but the kernel halts on
boot with "DATA ACCESS EXCEPTION".

This isn't a big deal, it just got me wondering what the status of gcc
and kernel compilation on sparc64 was.

-- 
Shawn Boyette      | He had reached the stage in a young man's life when
mdxi@collapsar.net | the grimness of the general human situation becomes
                   | evident; and the realization of this causes the
                   | ambition to halt a little
                   |              -- Thomas Hardy, "Return of the Native"



Reply to: