On Wed, 2014-05-14 at 18:30 +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 02:05:34PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > Since 'asm goto' has been around for a while, I suspect that the real
> > failure was in linking a 64-bit executable on 32-bit powerpc.
>
> Can't be. This script is called
On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 02:05:34PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> Since 'asm goto' has been around for a while, I suspect that the real
> failure was in linking a 64-bit executable on 32-bit powerpc.
Can't be. This script is called without any parameter, only the
compiler. Also it does not link b
On Tue, 2014-05-13 at 22:11 +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 09:04:45PM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> > Are you sure that powerpc is the only affected?
>
> This looks pretty much like an unstable compiler support check. This
> script hides any output, so we have no way to see
On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 09:04:45PM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> Are you sure that powerpc is the only affected?
This looks pretty much like an unstable compiler support check. This
script hides any output, so we have no way to see what happened:
| ifeq ($(shell $(CONFIG_SHELL) $(srctree)/scripts
On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 02:00:29AM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> I tried building 3.14.3-1 on powerpc, and that failed with a large ABI
> change (about 7000 out of 13000 symbols changed).
Okay, I can reproduce this with 3.14.2-1 in the powerpc64 image (not the
powerpc image).
> So I think that th
I tried building 3.14.3-1 on powerpc, and that failed with a large ABI
change (about 7000 out of 13000 symbols changed).
After searching for the source of the ABI change and finding no relevant
source or config changes, I tried rebuilding 3.14.2-1 with the ABI
reference files in place, and that al
6 matches
Mail list logo
