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

Re: making a sparc64 sid bootable

On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 12:29 PM, Frans van Berckel <fberckel@xs4all.nl> wrote:
> On Fri, 2015-08-21 at 12:07 +0200, Artyom Tarasenko wrote:
>> On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 8:20 AM, Frans van Berckel <
>> fberckel@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>> In the mean time, if you'd like to have a bootable system you can
>> build udevadm and systemd-udevd manually in the tree where you've
>> built the systemd deb, using the following commands:
> <snip>
>> # (It's the same as what make does except for one option: instead of
>> "-Wl,-fuse-ld=gold" use "-Wl,-fuse-ld=bfd")
>>  mv systemd-udevd /lib/systemd/
>>  mv udevadm /bin
>> These two were enough for me to make a sysvinit based system
>> bootable.
>> If you use systemd you'll have to rebuild more binaries. I this case
>> it would be better to modify the Makefile and build them all.
> I want that. If I am well, installing sysvinit will purge systemd?

It did in my case. I finally have a fully configured system:

#  dpkg --configure  -a
Setting up udev (224-1) ...
 operation parameter..addgroup: The group `input' already exists as a
system group. Exiting.
[ ok ] Stopping the hotplug events dispatcher: systemd-udevd.
[....] Starting the hotplug events dispatcher: systemd-udevdstarting version 224
. ok
update-initramfs: deferring update (trigger activated)
Setting up systemd-dbg (224-1) ...
Setting up initramfs-tools (0.120) ...
update-initramfs: deferring update (trigger activated)
Processing triggers for initramfs-tools (0.120) ...
update-initramfs: Generating /boot/initrd.img-3.2.0-4-sparc64

> Have you seen the comment by Cary Coutant at sourceware bug 18855?

Yep, answered offline first, because I'm not sure the .o files I have
are the proper ones.

> Do
> we have a SPARC box with development environment available?

I don't have a physical box, only use QEMU for testing stuff.


Artyom Tarasenko

SPARC and PPC PReP under qemu blog: http://tyom.blogspot.com/search/label/qemu

Reply to: