Uhgh, I'm using testing on this box, not unstable. Could the compiler be to blame for these large kernels? Even after chopping the config, I wound up with a 3.75 MB image (doing yet another compile, sigh...).
On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 04:47:19PM -0500, Ben Collins said: > Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2004 16:47:19 -0500 > From: Ben Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Mike Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: D Lambrou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, debian-sparc@lists.debian.org > Subject: Re: uncompressed image too long? > User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i > X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=ham version=2.60 > X-Spam-Level: > > On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 04:58:49PM -0500, Mike Edwards wrote: > > Ben, which compiler should I be using to compile this beast? egcs64? Or > > is there something newer by now? > > gcc-3.3 from unstable if you can. > > -- > Debian - http://www.debian.org/ > Linux 1394 - http://www.linux1394.org/ > Subversion - http://subversion.tigris.org/ > WatchGuard - http://www.watchguard.com/ -- Mike Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> System Administrator Psychology Department, Rutgers University, Newark campus 973-353-5440 x246
