Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752244AbZCMHFT (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Mar 2009 03:05:19 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750952AbZCMHFD (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Mar 2009 03:05:03 -0400 Received: from rex.securecomputing.com ([203.24.151.4]:55359 "EHLO cyberguard.com.au" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750761AbZCMHFC (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Mar 2009 03:05:02 -0400 Message-ID: <49BA0599.6070206@snapgear.com> Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2009 17:04:57 +1000 From: Greg Ungerer User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (X11/20090105) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Rob Landley CC: Geert Uytterhoeven , Sam Ravnborg , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dwmw2@infradead.org, linux-next@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: make headers_install broken for ARCH=m68k in 2.6.29-rc7. References: <200903120437.03837.rob@landley.net> <20090312210216.GB14205@uranus.ravnborg.org> <10f740e80903121540i30fdaddr600ce21f4159530a@mail.gmail.com> <200903122225.04560.rob@landley.net> In-Reply-To: <200903122225.04560.rob@landley.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3951 Lines: 92 Rob Landley wrote: > On Thursday 12 March 2009 17:40:02 Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: >> On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 22:02, Sam Ravnborg wrote: >>>> And, yes, I can confirm the m68k include/asm/unistd.h from linux-next >>>> actually has contents, thanks to commit >>>> 646652bded41f4c3bd375b4e03a25b42da93f40b >>>> >>>> Anyway, here's hoping the fix makes it into 2.6.29. >>> Why not telling the m68k maintainer that you think it should go into >>> 2.6.29? > > I contacted the headers_install maintainer about a headers_install problem, > and was pointed to an existing fix upstream. This seemed to imply awareness > of the problem? > > Happy to follow up more, wasn't aware it was required... > >> There are a few more: >> >> param.h:#include "param_no.h" >> param.h:#include "param_mm.h" >> ptrace.h:#include "ptrace_no.h" >> ptrace.h:#include "ptrace_mm.h" >> setup.h:#include "setup_no.h" >> setup.h:#include "setup_mm.h" >> sigcontext.h:#include "sigcontext_no.h" >> sigcontext.h:#include "sigcontext_mm.h" >> siginfo.h:#include "siginfo_no.h" >> siginfo.h:#include "siginfo_mm.h" >> signal.h:#include "signal_no.h" >> signal.h:#include "signal_mm.h" >> swab.h:#include "swab_no.h" >> swab.h:#include "swab_mm.h" >> >> Rob, do these also causes problems? >> Some (not all) of them are fixed in linux-next. > > I'm trying to build uClibc against the new headers. I just got around to > extracting the patch to fix that one file and testing it in my build system, > and this time it broke with: > > build/cross-compiler-m68k/include/asm/param.h:4:22: error: param_mm.h: No > such file or directory > > So yeah, it's still unhappy. Dunno how many of these are still needed to > build the cross compiler, and then who knows what other packages need to > build. Presumably all of it. > > Keep in mind I still haven't found an emulator for m68k that actually boots a > linux kernel, so my m68k support is purely theoretical. (I poked at mess and > uae a bit today, but they don't do the "qemu -kernel" thing I'm using for the > other targets, and qemu itself only seems to support coldfire and not a full- > blown m68k.) I'm following up on this because it's a regression. Under > 2.6.28 the m68k target was building a kernel and root filesystem, but I don't > have hardware to run it and have never been able to test it, so isn't really > very useful for me. It's really just there so that if qemu grows the rest of > m68k support (patches have been submitted but not merged), I'll be ready. > > P.S. If you're bored and want to try my test build for yourself: > > wget http://impactlinux.com/hg/firmware/archive/tip.tar.bz2 > tar xvjf tip.tar.bz2 > cd firmware-* > USE_UNSTABLE=linux ./build.sh m68k > > Without the USE_UNSTABLE=linux it uses 2.6.28 and builds to completion, with > it the build uses 2.6.29-rc7 (or whatever URL's listed as the UNSTABLE= value > for linux in download.sh) and it breaks trying to add uClibc to the cross > compiler. > > But then anything that actually _uses_ the "make headers_install" output to > build stuff against should notice pretty quickly whether or not it #includes > missing files. I pretty quick time I can fix up the last couple on the above list. But do we want to put all that change into 2.6.29-rc at this point? Regards Greg ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Greg Ungerer -- Principal Engineer EMAIL: gerg@snapgear.com SnapGear, a McAfee Company PHONE: +61 7 3435 2888 825 Stanley St, FAX: +61 7 3891 3630 Woolloongabba, QLD, 4102, Australia WEB: http://www.SnapGear.com -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/