Re: 2.6.11 kernel-source in preparation, config file changes.
On Fri, Mar 11, 2005 at 11:27:56AM -0600, Troy Benjegerdes wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 11, 2005 at 02:14:02PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 11, 2005 at 10:33:16AM +0100, Bastian Blank wrote:
> > > On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 07:13:01PM -0600, Troy Benjegerdes wrote:
> > > > what needs to get done yet so I can have something like
> > > > "ppc64-libs", and a gcc that can compile a 64 bit kernel?
> > >
> > > I tried to do that but failed in the first try. Now I have to find more
> > > time to retry it correctly. Maybe next week.
> >
> > Notice that we already have a biarch compiler on :
> >
> > http://debian-ppc64.alioth.debian.org/~luther/biarch/
> >
> > It was compiled by doko using the suse glibc headers.
> >
> > Not perfect, but well.
> >
> > ppc64 bit kernels need a 64bit psutils though, or you will see the risk of
> > having process ids overflow the 32bit field used in 32bit userland.
> >
> > A ppc64 kernel build with the above biarch kernel and a statically built
> > psutils-64 should do the trick though, not sure.
>
> I've installed that compiler, as well as a ppc64 chroot install from
> debian-ppc64.alioth.debian.org/gcc4
Ok.
> Have you tried building a kernel with that biarch compiler? What do I
> set GCC and LD to?
Yet, but it has been a while. it needs gcc-3.4 obviously, and you need to
build with ARCH=ppc64 i think, or something such. Last i tried was with the
debian 2.6.8 kernel, and the build system failed for some obscure reason to
pass the 64bit flag, and i haven't had time to do this first, and the fact
that this compiler is not in sarge or even experimental somewhat discouraged
me.
The easiest way would be to have a pseudo-package which contains only the
glibc headers, but externally to the glibc package per see, this way we could
have a biarch compiler in sid/experimental, without a new glibc. This would
not be really all that usefull as a full biarch toolchain, but already
something.
> I am also having trouble getting a simple test program to link (I'm
> trying to use the libc.a from the ppc64 chroot)
Ah, i had no problem with the crosstools, but using a cross compiler causes
other problems since make-kpkg was not really cross-compiler friendly.
I will have a go at this another time next week, once 2.6.11 is nicely out of
the way ?
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: