Re: 2.6.18-mm1 compile failure on x86_64

Andy Whitcroft
2006-09-26T12:45:47Z

Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> Andy Whitcroft wrote:
>> Martin Bligh wrote:
>>
>>> http://test.kernel.org/abat/49037/debug/test.log.0
>>> AS arch/x86_64/boot/bootsect.o
>>> LD arch/x86_64/boot/bootsect
>>> AS arch/x86_64/boot/setup.o
>>> LD arch/x86_64/boot/setup
>>> AS arch/x86_64/boot/compressed/head.o
>>> CC arch/x86_64/boot/compressed/misc.o
>>> OBJCOPY arch/x86_64/boot/compressed/vmlinux.bin
>>> BFD: Warning: Writing section `.data.percpu' to huge (ie negative) file
>>> offset 0x804700c0.
>>> /usr/local/autobench/sources/x86_64-cross/gcc-3.4.0-glibc-2.3.2/bin/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu-objcopy:
>>>
>>> arch/x86_64/boot/compressed/vmlinux.bin: File truncated
>>> make[2]: *** [arch/x86_64/boot/compressed/vmlinux.bin] Error 1
>>> make[1]: *** [arch/x86_64/boot/compressed/vmlinux] Error 2
>>> make: *** [bzImage] Error 2
>>> 09/25/06-09:13:48 Build the kernel. Failed rc = 2
>>> 09/25/06-09:13:49 build: kernel build Failed rc = 1
>>>
>>> Wierd. Same box compiled 2.6.18 fine.
>>>
>>
>> Pretty sure this isn't a space problem, as we have just checked space
>> before the build and I've taken no action since then. Someone did
>> mention "tool chain issue" when it was first spotted. Will check with
>> them and see why they thought that.
>>
>
> Does this box have an older version of binutils (2.15?)? If so, it
> might be getting upset over the patch "note-section" in Andi's queue. I
> know it has been a bit problematic, but I don't know if the problems
> manifest in this way.

Sure does:

ii binutils 2.14.90.0.7-8 The GNU assembler, linker and binary
utiliti

Thanks for the hint I'll try backing it out and see.

-apw