Re: uncompressed image too long?
Uhgh, I'm using testing on this box, not unstable.
Could the compiler be to blame for these large kernels? Even after chopping
the config, I wound up with a 3.75 MB image (doing yet another compile,
sigh...).
On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 04:47:19PM -0500, Ben Collins said:
> Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 16:47:19 -0500
> From: Ben Collins <bcollins@debian.org>
> To: Mike Edwards <sauron-debian-cd@psychology.rutgers.edu>
> Cc: D Lambrou <dlambrou@crazylinux.net>, debian-sparc@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: uncompressed image too long?
> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i
> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=ham version=2.60
> X-Spam-Level:
>
> On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 04:58:49PM -0500, Mike Edwards wrote:
> > Ben, which compiler should I be using to compile this beast? egcs64? Or
> > is there something newer by now?
>
> gcc-3.3 from unstable if you can.
>
> --
> Debian - http://www.debian.org/
> Linux 1394 - http://www.linux1394.org/
> Subversion - http://subversion.tigris.org/
> WatchGuard - http://www.watchguard.com/
--
Mike Edwards <sauron-debian-cd@psychology.rutgers.edu>
System Administrator
Psychology Department, Rutgers University, Newark campus
973-353-5440 x246
Reply to: