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

Re: kernel compile troubles with current 2.4 and 2.6



On Sun, 2003-12-21 at 21:39, Nathanael Hasbrouck wrote:
> Ok, I've got a little conundrum here - as noted in the "cannot compile latest 
> 2.4-benh kernel" thread [1], 2.4.23-ben1 sources were having trouble 
> compiling for some people.  I also have pretty much the same problem 
> compiling 2.6.0-ben1.  Error messages are slightly different, but both 
> basically tell me that 'pmu_nvram_read_byte' and 'pmu_nvram_write_byte' 
> undeclared in pmac_nvram.c. (Exact errors copied from console below, see [2], 
> let me know if more is needed.)  
> 
> This seems rather odd to me, is this a bug or have I got something put 
> together wrong on my end?  Does anyone else have the same problem with _both_ 
> kernel trees?  (I should probably note that both were rsynced from 
> source.mvista.com within the past 24 hours, and I'm running Sid on an 
> oldworld machine (7600).)
> 
> NRH
> -- 

to get it to compile just add 'Support for PMU based Macintosh' (i.e.
Powerbook/iBook) in the macintosh section... i do believe benh is aware
of this as i spoke with someone about it and they said they were going
to talk to him about it (among other things...which also reminds me,
dont add support for powermacintosh floppy drives... it wont compile
then either... it is a known bug...)


[sloopy@screw sloopy]$ uname -a
Linux screw 2.6.0-ben1 #2 Sat Dec 20 03:10:11 EST 2003 ppc ppc ppc
GNU/Linux
[sloopy@screw sloopy]$ cat /proc/cpuinfo
processor       : 0
cpu             : 740/750
clock           : 410MHz
revision        : 2.2 (pvr 0008 0202)
bogomips        : 813.05
machine         : Power Macintosh
motherboard     : AAPL,7500 MacRISC
detected as     : 16 (PowerMac 7500)
pmac flags      : 00000000
memory          : 256MB
l2cr override   : 0xb9180000
pmac-generation : OldWorld
[sloopy@screw sloopy]$ uptime
  1:14am  up 1 day, 21:41,  3 users,  load average: 0.29, 0.33, 0.20
[sloopy@screw sloopy]$


sloopy.




Reply to: