Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755649Ab1CNNR6 (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Mar 2011 09:17:58 -0400 Received: from mx3.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.1.138]:52559 "EHLO mx3.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753467Ab1CNNR4 (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Mar 2011 09:17:56 -0400 Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 14:17:29 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: Andreas Schwab Cc: Pekka Enberg , Jan Beulich , "H.J. Lu" , binutils@sourceware.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" , Alan Modra Subject: Re: PATCH: Add --size-check=[error|warning] Message-ID: <20110314131729.GB28851@elte.hu> References: <4D7DE39302000078000362E6@vpn.id2.novell.com> <20110314095534.GB18058@elte.hu> <20110314104131.GG6275@bubble.grove.modra.org> <20110314121321.GE23257@elte.hu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-08-17) X-ELTE-SpamScore: -2.0 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-2.0 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.3.1 -2.0 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2182 Lines: 63 * Andreas Schwab wrote: > Ingo Molnar writes: > > > * Andreas Schwab wrote: > > > >> Pekka Enberg writes: > >> > >> > Hi Andreas, > >> > > >> > Pekka Enberg 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 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 -- 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/