Hi Russell, On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 00:09:43 +0000 Russell King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 12:02:08PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > I will attempt to build the tree between each merge (and a failed build > > will again cause the offending tree to be dropped). These builds will be > > necessarily restricted to probably one architecture/config. I will build > > the entire tree on as many architectures/configs as seem sensible and > > the results of that will be available on a web page (to be announced). > > This restriction means that the value for the ARM architecture is soo > limited it's probably not worth the hastle participating in this project. > > We already know that -mm picks up on very few ARM conflicts because > Andrew doesn't run through the entire set of configurations; unfortunately > ARM is one of those architectures which is very diverse [*], and because > of that, ideas like "allyconfig" are just completely irrelevant to it. > > As mentioned elsewhere, what we need for ARM is to extend the kautobuild > infrastructure (see armlinux.simtec.co.uk) so that we can have more trees > at least compile tested regularly - but that requires the folk there to > have additional compute power (which isn't going to happen unless folk > stamp up some machines _or_ funding).
I now have an arm cross compiler (gcc-4.0.2-glibc-2.3.6 arm-unknown-linux-gnu). (See the results page at http://kisskb.ellerman.id.au/kisskb/branch/9/ - I must get a better name/place :-(.) Is this sufficient to help you out? What configs would be useful to build (as Andrew said, they don't take very long each). I really want as many subsystems as possible in the linux-next tree in an attempt to avoid some of the merge/conflict problems we have had in the past. What can we do to help? -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/
pgp7FBm2sHObu.pgp
Description: PGP signature
