Compiling 2.3.18

Compiling 2.3.18

[Claude Robitaille]

Hi,

I have no success at compiling (actually just doing make dep) the
2.3.18 kernel source I downloaded from linuxppc.cs.nmt.edu (I think
it is from Dave's source tree). I am getting the following error:

make -C sound fastdep
make[4]: Entering directory `/usr/src/linux-2.3.18.embedded/drivers/sound'
.depend.69: *** unterminated call to function `wildcard': missing `)'.
Stop.
make[4]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/linux-2.3.18.embedded/drviers/sound'
make[3]: *** [_sfdep_sound] Error 2

etc.


There is no function `wildcard' in any files, except for Makefile.

I tried with different .config files, including the default file created
by make xconfig.

I downloaded 2.3.18 from edge.kernelnotes.org and I am able to compile
(after fixing one of the Config.in file).

Could it be a problem with Dave's tar (as for fadsrom.tar)?

I am targetting a board with an MPC8xx, does the source from the
embedded tree at linuxppc.cs.nmt.edu better than the one from
cutting edge (if I can compile it !!), i.e. it there required
stuff that only appears in the embedded source tree?

Thanks

Claude


** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

Re: Compiling 2.3.18

[Dan Malek]

Claude Robitaille wrote:

> I have no success at compiling (actually just doing make dep) the
> 2.3.18 kernel source I downloaded from linuxppc.cs.nmt.edu...

I'll download it and take a look, although this is now out
of date with the CVS tree.

> I downloaded 2.3.18 from edge.kernelnotes.org and I am able to compile
> (after fixing one of the Config.in file).

This looks like a mirror, so it is likely up to date.  What
was the problem with Config.in?

> Could it be a problem with Dave's tar (as for fadsrom.tar)?

I don't understand why some people have problems with this file.
I continually download and extract it just fine on any of my
Linux machines.  What are you using?


> I am targetting a board with an MPC8xx, does the source from the
> embedded tree at linuxppc.cs.nmt.edu better....

I usually put something there as a convenience for people that
can't get CVS access through a fire wall.  It represents my
source tree, which is known to build, just before I make CVS commits.


	-- Dan

** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

Re: Compiling 2.3.18

[Claude Robitaille]

On Mon, 20 Sep 1999, Dan Malek wrote:

> 
> > I downloaded 2.3.18 from edge.kernelnotes.org and I am able to compile
> > (after fixing one of the Config.in file).
> 
> This looks like a mirror, so it is likely up to date.  What
> was the problem with Config.in?

it was with the drivers/char/Config.in. Thew problem was a missing ] in
an if statement, unfortunately, I do not remember which line ... :-( Next
time, I'll take notes. Unless I send the file to you so you could do
a diff.

> 
> > Could it be a problem with Dave's tar (as for fadsrom.tar)?
> 
> I don't understand why some people have problems with this file.
> I continually download and extract it just fine on any of my
> Linux machines.  What are you using?
> 
I had the same problem with fasdron.tar.gz (or tgz...), At that
time, I had tried both RH6.0 on a Pentium and R5 on a PowerMac
(but I guess the tools are from the same sources anyway). This time
it was on the PowerMac. But, anyway, I avoided the problem by
having drivers/Makfile not to compile the drivers/sound directory
if CONFIG_SOUND is not set. I added an ifdef statement.

> 
> I usually put something there as a convenience for people that
> can't get CVS access through a fire wall.  It represents my
> source tree, which is known to build, just before I make CVS commits.
> 
> 

if I understand well, right after your local source tree, CVS is the most
up to date. I never used it and I am not behind a firewall, where are the
instructions on how to use it, i.e. do you have an URL?


Claude


** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

Re: Compiling 2.3.18

[Claude Robitaille]

I am now able to run make dep using different board type (I have not
tested them all, and I do not know which type will be the closer
to my target; is there a description somewhere?).

Compiling (make zImage) fails :-(

It stops when doing sched.c with an error basically saying that
NR_8259_INTS is undefined.

I dig into the problem and found that the chain of defines/includes
is sched.c -> kernel_stat.h -> irq.h -> mpc8xx.h -> board_specific.h

kernel_stat uses NR_IRQS
irq.h defines NR_IRQS using NR_8259_INTS
board_specific.h defines NR_8259_INTS

the problem is that irq.h includes mpc8xx.h AFTER it uses NR_8259_INTS

Is it ok to move the mpc8xx.h inclusion statement earlier in the
irq.h file? Is there a reason for it to be late in the file?

Claude 


** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

Re: Compiling 2.3.18

[Dan Malek]

Claude Robitaille wrote:

> Is it ok to move the mpc8xx.h inclusion statement earlier in the
> irq.h file? Is there a reason for it to be late in the file?

I guess I need to ask what you are building and with what kernel.
The current file configuration seems to work fine with all of the
other boards.


	-- Dan

** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

Re: Compiling 2.3.18

[Claude Robitaille]

I am not sure I understand your question, but I'll try my
best to answer it.

I want to build a minimal kernel for a target that only has
an MPC860 with an SMC based console and a 10BaseT Enet,
pretty much like the fads.

I do not know which board type is the closest but I know that
the MBX is way too complex (the resulting kernel image will
certainly be bigger than necessary). Originaly, anyway, I was
not even able to make dep with the mbx target (which I think is
your preferred target), probably this is due to the minimalist
configuration (as lean as possible) I am using.

So, I am building using the 2.3.18 sources I found in the
embedded linuxppc.cs.nmt.edu using a stock pmac (7300) with
2.2.10

Can you send me a known working .config file, I've overwritten
the one that came with the tar file.


Claude


On Tue, 21 Sep 1999, Dan Malek wrote:

> 
> Claude Robitaille wrote:
> 
> > Is it ok to move the mpc8xx.h inclusion statement earlier in the
> > irq.h file? Is there a reason for it to be late in the file?
> 
> I guess I need to ask what you are building and with what kernel.
> The current file configuration seems to work fine with all of the
> other boards.


** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/