Re: which 2.2 kernel for sparc ?
Ben Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I would say the 2.2.12 kernel since 2.2.11 saw a huge sparc sync. From what I've heard this sounds right. 2.2.12 is probably going to be release wide, if we do a stable update (what I call Debian 2.1.1). As far as compilers I would suggest the gcc-2.95.1 for the sparc32 compiler. Right now egcs64 does good for sparc64 kernels, but some parts (notably qlogic and 3c* drivers) don't compile, and possible other parts as well. Do you mean egcs64 from stable? Does it raise issues to use a potato compiler to compile the kernel for a slink update? I guess the kernel is pretty stand-alone, so it would technically work, but I don't like it due to the boot-strapping issues (i.e., how would a Sun4u user recompile their kernel on a slink box?). -- .Adam Di [EMAIL PROTECTED]URL:http://www.onShore.com/
Re: which 2.2 kernel for sparc ?
On Tue, Aug 31, 1999 at 04:03:57AM -0400, Adam Di Carlo wrote: Ben Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I would say the 2.2.12 kernel since 2.2.11 saw a huge sparc sync. From what I've heard this sounds right. 2.2.12 is probably going to be release wide, if we do a stable update (what I call Debian 2.1.1). As far as compilers I would suggest the gcc-2.95.1 for the sparc32 compiler. Right now egcs64 does good for sparc64 kernels, but some parts (notably qlogic and 3c* drivers) don't compile, and possible other parts as well. Do you mean egcs64 from stable? Does it raise issues to use a potato compiler to compile the kernel for a slink update? I guess the kernel is pretty stand-alone, so it would technically work, but I don't like it due to the boot-strapping issues (i.e., how would a Sun4u user recompile their kernel on a slink box?). The egcs64 from potato is what I am refering to. It has several fixes over the slink version. Ben
which 2.2 kernel for sparc ?
Hello, I'm starting to work on a new set of bootdisks for one of the next 2.1 subrelease. Since the 2.2.9 kernel built in potato are not usable for installation software (heavily required features left out of the kernel itself, like iso9660 support, ...), I want to build a new one. Could I go with 2.2.12 or do I need to stick to a previous one ? Moreover, which compiler should I use to build both sparc32 sparc64 kernels ? slink or potato ? Thanks in advance. -- Eric Delaunay | La guerre justifie l'existence des militaires. [EMAIL PROTECTED] | En les supprimant. Henri Jeanson (1900-1970)
Re: which 2.2 kernel for sparc ?
On Mon, Aug 30, 1999 at 11:30:27PM +0200, Eric Delaunay wrote: Hello, I'm starting to work on a new set of bootdisks for one of the next 2.1 subrelease. Since the 2.2.9 kernel built in potato are not usable for installation software (heavily required features left out of the kernel itself, like iso9660 support, ...), I want to build a new one. Could I go with 2.2.12 or do I need to stick to a previous one ? Moreover, which compiler should I use to build both sparc32 sparc64 kernels ? slink or potato ? Thanks in advance. I would say the 2.2.12 kernel since 2.2.11 saw a huge sparc sync. As far as compilers I would suggest the gcc-2.95.1 for the sparc32 compiler. Right now egcs64 does good for sparc64 kernels, but some parts (notably qlogic and 3c* drivers) don't compile, and possible other parts as well. I am working on rolling out 64bit support in our default gcc-2.95.1 compiler (default to -m32, but able to accept -m64). So far I have not had problems running a kernel (2.2.12 and 2.3.15) compiled with this on sparc64. Hope to give you more info tonight, I am right in the middle of setting up this gcc build for the 64bit support. Ben
