Pekka Enberg <[email protected]> writes:
> So what do you suggest that testers who want to, say, build old Linux
> kernel versions with new binutils do?
The same that testers have to do in order to build old Linux kernel
versions with current versions of make.
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, [email protected]
GPG Key fingerprint = D4E8 DBE3 3813 BB5D FA84 5EC7 45C6 250E 6F00 984E
"And now for something completely different."
Hi Andreas,
Pekka Enberg <[email protected]> writes:
>> So what do you suggest that testers who want to, say, build old Linux
>> kernel versions with new binutils do?
On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 1:02 PM, Andreas Schwab <[email protected]> wrote:
> The same that testers have to do in order to build old Linux kernel
> versions with current versions of make.
Are you saying it's OK to screw over binutils users because GNU Make
did that too?
Pekka
Pekka Enberg <[email protected]> writes:
> Hi Andreas,
>
> Pekka Enberg <[email protected]> writes:
>>> So what do you suggest that testers who want to, say, build old Linux
>>> kernel versions with new binutils do?
>
> On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 1:02 PM, Andreas Schwab <[email protected]> wrote:
>> The same that testers have to do in order to build old Linux kernel
>> versions with current versions of make.
>
> Are you saying it's OK to screw over binutils users because GNU Make
> did that too?
I'm just telling you the facts.
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, [email protected]
GPG Key fingerprint = D4E8 DBE3 3813 BB5D FA84 5EC7 45C6 250E 6F00 984E
"And now for something completely different."
* Pekka Enberg <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Andreas,
>
> Pekka Enberg <[email protected]> writes:
> >> So what do you suggest that testers who want to, say, build old Linux
> >> kernel versions with new binutils do?
>
> On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 1:02 PM, Andreas Schwab <[email protected]> wrote:
> > The same that testers have to do in order to build old Linux kernel
> > versions with current versions of make.
>
> Are you saying it's OK to screw over binutils users because GNU Make
> did that too?
The claim is not even true.
While really old Linux versions wont build with fresh versions of Make, something
like v2.6.30, which is a 2 years old kernel, will build just fine, using latest
Make.
So lets stop coming up with all the wrong reasons to not fix this problem ...
Thanks,
Ingo
* Andreas Schwab <[email protected]> wrote:
> Pekka Enberg <[email protected]> writes:
>
> > Hi Andreas,
> >
> > Pekka Enberg <[email protected]> writes:
> >>> So what do you suggest that testers who want to, say, build old Linux
> >>> kernel versions with new binutils do?
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 1:02 PM, Andreas Schwab <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> The same that testers have to do in order to build old Linux kernel
> >> versions with current versions of make.
> >
> > Are you saying it's OK to screw over binutils users because GNU Make
> > did that too?
>
> I'm just telling you the facts.
And you are wrong - latest Make does not break reasonably old kernel builds such as
v2.6.30.
Latest binutils insta-breaks the build over 130,000 commits, including the latest
released kernel.
Please change that .size build error to a build warning, to avoid this unnecessary
collateral damage.
Thanks,
Ingo
Ingo Molnar <[email protected]> writes:
> * Andreas Schwab <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Pekka Enberg <[email protected]> writes:
>>
>> > Hi Andreas,
>> >
>> > Pekka Enberg <[email protected]> writes:
>> >>> So what do you suggest that testers who want to, say, build old Linux
>> >>> kernel versions with new binutils do?
>> >
>> > On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 1:02 PM, Andreas Schwab <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> The same that testers have to do in order to build old Linux kernel
>> >> versions with current versions of make.
>> >
>> > Are you saying it's OK to screw over binutils users because GNU Make
>> > did that too?
>>
>> I'm just telling you the facts.
>
> And you are wrong
This is just ridiculous. You are defining away facts just because they
don't fit your view.
> latest Make does not break reasonably old kernel builds such as
> v2.6.30.
$ git tag --contains 3c955b4 | head -1
v2.6.36
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, [email protected]
GPG Key fingerprint = D4E8 DBE3 3813 BB5D FA84 5EC7 45C6 250E 6F00 984E
"And now for something completely different."
* Andreas Schwab <[email protected]> wrote:
> Ingo Molnar <[email protected]> writes:
>
> > * Andreas Schwab <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> Pekka Enberg <[email protected]> writes:
> >>
> >> > Hi Andreas,
> >> >
> >> > Pekka Enberg <[email protected]> writes:
> >> >>> So what do you suggest that testers who want to, say, build old Linux
> >> >>> kernel versions with new binutils do?
> >> >
> >> > On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 1:02 PM, Andreas Schwab <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> >> The same that testers have to do in order to build old Linux kernel
> >> >> versions with current versions of make.
> >> >
> >> > Are you saying it's OK to screw over binutils users because GNU Make
> >> > did that too?
> >>
> >> I'm just telling you the facts.
> >
> > And you are wrong - latest Make does not break reasonably old kernel builds such
> > as v2.6.30.
>
> This is just ridiculous.
> You are defining away facts just because they don't fit your view.
No, i actually tried out the latest released Make version (3.82) and it still builds
v2.6.30 fine:
LD arch/x86/boot/setup.elf
OBJCOPY arch/x86/boot/setup.bin
BUILD arch/x86/boot/bzImage
Root device is (8, 1)
Setup is 12364 bytes (padded to 12800 bytes).
System is 3730 kB
CRC 77bb7f2d
Kernel: arch/x86/boot/bzImage is ready (#105830)
The kernel build count is at 105830 because i build and test a lot of kernels on
this box.
And the resulting kernel boots fine on a testbox:
mercury:~> uname -a
Linux mercury 2.6.30 #105830 SMP Mon Mar 14 12:29:06 CET 2011 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
I have built and booted over half a million Linux kernels in the past 3-4 years so i
generally have quite a bit of experience when it comes to build environment bugs and
workflow problems. Breaking the build retroactively and unnecessarily like here is
one of the worst things that can be done to testing quality and efficiency.
Thanks,
Ingo
Ingo Molnar <[email protected]> writes:
> * Andreas Schwab <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Ingo Molnar <[email protected]> writes:
>>
>> > * Andreas Schwab <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Pekka Enberg <[email protected]> writes:
>> >>
>> >> > Hi Andreas,
>> >> >
>> >> > Pekka Enberg <[email protected]> writes:
>> >> >>> So what do you suggest that testers who want to, say, build old Linux
>> >> >>> kernel versions with new binutils do?
>> >> >
>> >> > On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 1:02 PM, Andreas Schwab <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> >> The same that testers have to do in order to build old Linux kernel
>> >> >> versions with current versions of make.
>> >> >
>> >> > Are you saying it's OK to screw over binutils users because GNU Make
>> >> > did that too?
>> >>
>> >> I'm just telling you the facts.
>> >
>> > And you are wrong - latest Make does not break reasonably old kernel builds such
>> > as v2.6.30.
>>
>> This is just ridiculous.
>> You are defining away facts just because they don't fit your view.
>
> No, i actually tried out the latest released Make version (3.82) and it still builds
> v2.6.30 fine:
That's a very convincing argument.
Andreas.
--
Andreas Schwab, [email protected]
GPG Key fingerprint = D4E8 DBE3 3813 BB5D FA84 5EC7 45C6 250E 6F00 984E
"And now for something completely different."