On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 15:31:14 +0100, Colin Leroy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Using 2.6.10 and 2.6.11, trying to use dd from the ide cdrom in my
> Ibook G4 fails like this:
> /dev/hdc:
> HDIO_GET_MULTCOUNT failed: Invalid argument
> IO_support = 0 (default 16-bit)
> unmaskirq= 1
On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 12:48:55 +0100, Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 12, 2004 at 05:01:16PM -0200, Rafael Ávila de Espíndola wrote:
> > I have successfully build a multiarch gcc in a ppc64. To do so I made some
> > changes to Andreas patch:
>
> Notice that doko has already buil
On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 01:35:08 +1100, Anton Blanchard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Yep, Alan Modra fixed binutils at some stage so it could create multiple
> TOCs and -mminimal-toc isnt required.
>
> With older binutils the gcc -mminimal-toc option is the way to go.
In what version of bi
On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 16:32:12 -0200, Rafael Espíndola
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> once more the problem was that the compile system was assuming that
> "gcc -print-multi-directory" would print 64 if the resulting library
> should be 64 bits.
I had a brief talk with Alexand
On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 09:58:52 -0800, Brad Boyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I haven't tried it, but the error does look familiar. I think this is
> the error you get when binaries get too many symbols. The TOC normally
> fits in a single 16bit offset window. If your binary gets too big, it
> can't
On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 14:37:33 +0100, Andreas Jochens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I get the same error here and I have no idea what it means or how to fix
> it. Nevertheless, I am still trying to build a newer binutils packages,
> even if I do not know if this will help.
I found a patch that prevent
> I did a ./debian/rules patch and right now the source is building in a
> ppc64 gentoo with the same arguments used in the debian package.
> Gentoo has a newer bintuils and that may make a difference.
It didn't :(
.libs/libgcj.la-2.o(.text+0x22db32): In function
`.gnu::java::locale::LocaleInform
On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 21:19:56 +0100, Andreas Jochens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yes this was wrong, thanks. I just reuploaded gcc-3.4 and gcc-4.0 with a
> similar new patch to the alioth ppc64 archive. I also uploaded a new 32
> bit enabled glibc package which creates 'libc6-powerpc' and
> 'libc6-
I have made some changes on Andreas gcc patch
(http://debian-ppc64.alioth.debian.org/gcc4/patches/gcc-3.4_3.4.3-1.0.0.1.gcc4.patch)
.
The most significant change is to prevent xgcc from thinking that it
is building a 32 bits version of libgcc when "gcc
--print-multi-os-directory" displays "lib" an
On Wed, 8 Dec 2004 20:51:11 +0100, Andreas Jochens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have PowerMac G5 1800 MHz with a single processor.
>
> I actually started my ppc64 porting efforts because I was
> not able to install the 32 bit Debian powerpc port on that
> machine using the Debian installer from
On Wed, 8 Dec 2004 12:44:47 +0100, Andreas Jochens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 04-Dec-08 11:34, Sven Luther wrote:
> I have prepared a patch for the glibc package which makes glibc compile
> and work for ppc64. The patch can be found at
>
> http://debian-ppc64.alioth.debian.org/gcc4/patches/gl
On Sat, 04 Dec 2004 09:35:25 +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
...
>On the other hand, ppc64 is pretty much
> just that: same core, same amount of registers, just things running in
> 64 bits mode, which tend to mean slightly larger code, and thus slightly
> slower as well.
On Fri, 3 Dec 2004 21:02:47 +0100, Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 02, 2004 at 04:46:59PM -0200, Rafael Ávila de Espíndola wrote:
> > Hi, I have done some work on porting debian to the powerpc64. The original
> > post:
> > http://lists.debian.org/debian-powerpc/2004/10/msg00193
13 matches
Mail list logo
