On Sun, 26 May 2013 18:23:15 +0200 (CEST)
Petr Salinger wrote:
> What is your grub version ?
> Please could you gunzip kernel image and send "readelf -l filename".
>
> The problem might be too big kernel, which can be handled only by
> grub2 2.00-13 and above. See #699002,
Aha, thanks. I instal
I'm not sure if it's noteworthy, but I backported gcc-4.8 to wheezy
rather than installing directly from jessie/sid, since we're using
wheezy as a stable base internally.
I'll continue to try different things and see if there is any change
here.
What is your grub version ?
Please could you gunz
Hi,
On Tue, 21 May 2013 18:40:47 +0200 (CEST)
Petr Salinger wrote:
> I tried to use gcc-4.8 and current r250856 snapshot.
> It builds and boots fine on my real hardware (kfreebsd-amd64).
> The exact set of used patches is now in glibc-bsd SVN.
I've built a kernel package from r250856 using the
Hi Petr,
On Tue, 21 May 2013 18:40:47 +0200 (CEST)
Petr Salinger wrote:
> I tried to use gcc-4.8 and current r250856 snapshot.
> It builds and boots fine on my real hardware (kfreebsd-amd64).
> The exact set of used patches is now in glibc-bsd SVN.
Excellent, thanks for that. I've been busier t
Hi.
I tried to use gcc-4.8 and current r250856 snapshot.
It builds and boots fine on my real hardware (kfreebsd-amd64).
The exact set of used patches is now in glibc-bsd SVN.
Petr
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
On Sun, 12 May 2013 18:57:33 +0200 (CEST)
Petr Salinger wrote:
> Does it fail/panic using all available gcc versions ?
> I suggest to start test with gcc-4.3 from squeeze.
> Does it fail/panic with different optimisation levels (-O2 -O1 -O0
> -Os) ? See i.e. #594288.
Thanks, I hadn't considered
Any suggestions as to how to proceed would be welcome. =)
Does it fail/panic using all available gcc versions ?
I suggest to start test with gcc-4.3 from squeeze.
Does it fail/panic with different optimisation levels (-O2 -O1 -O0 -Os) ?
See i.e. #594288.
I expect, that some patches have to be u
On Thu, 9 May 2013 00:33:00 +1000
Steven McDonald wrote:
> I think this is ultimately not an efficient means of investigation to
> pursue, so I plan to drop it and go back to trial and error -- I'll
> add more and more of the responsible function definition until it
> breaks, and then we can poin
On Tue, 07 May 2013 22:15:07 +0200
Christoph Egger wrote:
> FWIW I've been seeing this with gcc-4.6 gcc-4.7 and clang -- that's
> the reason we still don't have a newer kfreebsd-10 upload in the
> archive. Thank you for starting to dig! This is also the reason we
> have no 9.1 in kfreebsd-9 at le
Hi all!
Steven McDonald writes:
>> Which compiler did you build with? Still using gcc-4.6?
>
> Using gcc-4.6, yes.
FWIW I've been seeing this with gcc-4.6 gcc-4.7 and clang -- that's the
reason we still don't have a newer kfreebsd-10 upload in the
archive. Thank you for starting to dig! This is
Hi Steven,
Thanks for the reply!
On Tue, 07 May 2013 13:56:36 +0100
Steven Chamberlain wrote:
> So the very last thing shown on-screen would be "Loading kernel of
> FreeBSD ...", and is that still visible when the system hangs?
I should have been a bit more descriptive here, sorry. GRUB output
Hi Steven,
On 07/05/13 13:26, Steven McDonald wrote:
> When I say "non-booting", there is literally no
> output from the kernel at all after GRUB loads it.
So the very last thing shown on-screen would be "Loading kernel of
FreeBSD ...", and is that still visible when the system hangs?
How are yo
Hi,
I've been attempting to build newer kfreebsd-10 packages derived from
the package currently in experimental. I'm able to build working kernel
packages with orig tarballs up to and including r248991 with some
changes to the patches and an additional one (which I intend to submit
to the BTS lat
13 matches
Mail list logo
