re:Success I compiled a 2.1 kernel
In message "Success I compiled a 2.1 kernel", geiger@iem.mhsg.ac.at writes:
> I never have been able to compile the 2.1 kernels. I didn't care too
> much either. Today I succeeded.
> I only had to comment the SMP=1 line in the Makefile.
>
> Aehm ... is this somewhere in the Documentation, or am I the
> only stupid ???
This is exactly what happened to me. The first time I tried to compile
2.1.65 , it bombed out on the first file, as I described in a previous
post. Digging around last night, I found out why.
The problem is that in the file linux/include/asm-alpha/spinlock.h , the
type rwlock_t is only declared if the macro __SMP__ is NOT defined. This
is controlled by the variable SMP in the Makefile, which is set by
default.
The absence of this type declaration is obviously a bug. Could someone
who knows the procedure report this to the kernel-list or whatever the
appropriate forum is?
Since there are many more uniprocessors than multiprocessors running
Linux, maybe the default option should be non-SMP. This ought to be in
the config process, although there is a comment in the Makefile about
why it isn't.
I didn't see anything about this in the build document either, so if
it's mentioned, you're not the only stupid. :-)
Ian Willmott
Northern Telecom
Ottawa Ontario
willmott@nortel.ca
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-alpha-request@lists.debian.org .
Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
Reply to: