From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ulf Samuelsson Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 23:41:41 +0100 Subject: [Buildroot] build problems References: <1CD05B980C94AC408B37C82BBABAA3E60ACA8184@mtsexchange.dc.multitech.prv> Message-ID: <034f01c88ece$ef015bf0$040514ac@atmel.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net > Well, I guess part of the problem is that there is no at91sam9260ek > directory in the target/device/atmel directory, even though there is a > at91sam9260ek target board selection in the buildroot .config file. The > two target directories available are at91sam9260dfc and at91sam9260pf. I > am not sure if the dfc means DataFlash card or chip, but the board could > use either I think. The card interface is CS_0 and the on-board chip is > CS_1. The board I have did not come with a DataFlash card so it has been > booting off of the on-board chip. So I assume I can use the dfc > defconfig but make sure the boot memory parameter in the config files is > set to CS_1. Yes, but your development would be much easier if you got a few free samples of an AT45DCB008D Dataflashcard. > > Also, when I run it right now and try to do a "make configured", I get > an error because it can't copy busybox-1.9.2.config. It looks like > busybox has been updated, but a new config file has not been put into > the target/device/atmel/at91sam9260dfc directory. So do I rename the > busybox-1.9.1.config file to busybox-1.9.2.config? I think this will work. The problem is that people updating the busybox support, disables the use of older busybox, which will force the saved config to update the version. I am not sure that this is a good idea. > Also, if I run "make > menuconfig" from the buildroot directory and look at the package > selection, busybox-1.9.x is selected. But the parameter 'busybox > configuration file to use' has '/package/busybox/busybox-1.6.0.config" > in it. Really confusing. > Not sure, but I think this is overridden in the Atmel makefile. > Some possibly good news, though. Using the at91sam9260dfc defconfig and > renaming the "busybox-1.9.1.config" file to "busybox-1.9.2.config" it > seems I finally completed a build. There are files in the binaries > directory of my project now. The linux kernel is 4mb so I assume it is > not a uImage, and I need to find where that setting is. Then I need to > see if it actually runs without panicking. It is probably set to "vmlinux" in the kernel configuration. > > But, if I understand things correctly, the uboot and boot.bin files in > the binaries directory are for a EK board with a DataFlash card in the > SD slot, and would not work for the DataFlash chip on the board. I > wonder if I replaced the kernel and rfs files in the prebuilt binary > package I downloaded from Linux4Sam, I could get it to work? I will try > that when I get a chance. I hope so. > > Timothy Barr > Hardware Development Engineer > for Multi-Tech Systems, Inc. > tbarr at multitech.com > > -----Original Message----- > From: buildroot-bounces at uclibc.org [mailto:buildroot-bounces at uclibc.org] > On Behalf Of John Voltz > Sent: Monday, March 24, 2008 7:52 AM > To: Buildroot List > Subject: Re: [Buildroot] build problems > > > Timothy, > > What type of problems are you having with buildroot? What's failing for > you? > > John Voltz > > > On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 8:45 AM, Tim Barr wrote: > > I have had a similar problem, Steve. I wonder if any of the maintainers > has tried running buildroot after a dirclean recently? Or cleared out > the download directory to see if any package download interfaces have > changed? I have been trying to get a successful buildroot process (for > an AT91SAM9260EK) to complete for over 3 months now with no luck > whatsoever. I ended up having to buy a Timesys linuxlink license in > order to move forward. > > Timothy Barr > Hardware Development Engineer > for Multi-Tech Systems, Inc. > tbarr at multitech.com > Best Regards Ulf Samuelsson