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

Re: difference between armv3l and armv4l, ...

On Fri, Mar 23, 2001 at 10:43:26AM +0000, Philip Blundell wrote:
> >we need to make sure that the native code compiler don't make use of these
> >extra instructions though. from a quick glance at ocaml-3.01/asmrun/arm.S, i
> >don't think that is so, after all this file is pretty short, but then i know
> >nothing about arm assembly. Could you please look at it (it is 338 lines only)
> >and check that no armv4l instructions are used ?
> Will do.  But, looking at the build daemon logs, ocaml 3.01-4 won't build even 
> on armv4l:
> ../../../boot/ocamlrun ../../../ocamlopt -I ../../../stdlib -labels -c -I ../support tk.ml
> /tmp/camlasm2.s: Assembler messages:
> /tmp/camlasm2.s:26142: Error: Invalid constant
> /tmp/camlasm2.s:30129: Error: Invalid constant
> Assembler error, input left in file /tmp/camlasm2.s
> make[3]: *** [tk.cmx] Error 2

Ocaml 3.01-2 (older version, since i had already downloaded it there) builds
fine on arm.debian.org. I understand that this is a potato box, is it possible
for me to log in a arm box running unstable to test this divers things ? I
would need all ocaml build-depends installed on that box also, maybe, but i
think to find the real problem, this may not be necessary.

Or maybe it would be possible to have a chrooted unstable environment on
arm.debian.org, like it is done on other debian boxes ?

Anyway, if this is still a problem, then it may be a problem introduced by the
passage from whatever binutil version was used in potato and the one in
unstable right now.

Also, notice, i have seen similar message when building kernels, that where
gone when i again upgraded, maybe this is similar ?


Sven Luther

Reply to: