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

Re: 2.6.16-rc2 sparc32 (and sparc64) kernel images available

On Thu, Feb 09, 2006 at 09:46:14AM -0800, Jurij Smakov wrote:
> Hi,

> I've committed the changes to build sparc32 images to the experimental 
> branch of the svn and run a test build. The resulting images are available 
> for download at http://www.wooyd.org/debian/kernels/. As soon as other

Thanks for your work!
> Please share your experiences. Note that yaird has some problems with 

Today I have decided to go to the cellar to take my old SparcStation 4,
which was waiting there for months (I now have a faster Ultra 10). I 
have started it, upgraded to current sid, it still works well, but 
using a 2.6.8 kernel from Sarge.

Then I have tried your kernel. I have got a problem at boot, it seems 
the image is too big:

Boot device: /iommu/sbus/espdma@4,8400000/esp@4,8800000/sd@3,0  File and args:
SILO Version 1.4.9
Uncompressing image...
Decompression error: uncompressed image too long - wouldn't fit into destination

Error loading /boot/vmlinuz

Here are the size of the images:

-rw-------  1 root root 1222009 2006-02-12 21:37 /boot/initrd.img-2.6.16-rc2-sparc32
-rw-r--r--  1 root root 2564096 2005-07-11 13:26 /boot/initrd.img-2.6.8-2-sparc32
-rw-r--r--  1 root root 1261896 2006-02-10 12:33 /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.16-rc2-sparc32
-rw-r--r--  1 root root  994063 2005-06-10 04:16 /boot/vmlinuz-2.6.8-2-sparc32

As you can see the size of vmlinuz 2.6.15-rc2 is bigger than the 2.6.8
one. On the contrary, the size of the initrd is smaller.

IIRC, the size limit is 3.4MB for sparc64 and 2.4 for sparc32. However,
the uncompressed size of vmlinuz is 2.1MB, so I may be wrong.

It looks like some part of the kernel has to be put into modules. I will
try to have a look next week-end.


  .''`.  Aurelien Jarno	            | GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73
 : :' :  Debian developer           | Electrical Engineer
 `. `'   aurel32@debian.org         | aurelien@aurel32.net
   `-    people.debian.org/~aurel32 | www.aurel32.net

Reply to: