Re: compile quirk linux-2.6.24 (with workaround)

2008-03-03 Thread Bernhard Reiter
On Monday 25 February 2008 12:56, Bernhard Reiter wrote: > On Friday 22 February 2008 15:50, Bernhard Reiter wrote: > > > Ok, so it seems -mcpu=440 was added in gcc 3.4.  The -mcpu=405 option > > > has been around since 2001.  Seeing as how there really isn't anything > > > 440 specific in the file

Re: compile quirk linux-2.6.24 (with workaround)

2008-02-25 Thread Bernhard Reiter
On Friday 22 February 2008 15:50, Bernhard Reiter wrote: > > Ok, so it seems -mcpu=440 was added in gcc 3.4.  The -mcpu=405 option > > has been around since 2001.  Seeing as how there really isn't anything > > 440 specific in the files effected, we should be able to pass -mcpu=405 > > for everythin

Re: compile quirk linux-2.6.24 (with workaround)

2008-02-22 Thread Bernhard Reiter
On Tuesday 19 February 2008 03:52, Josh Boyer wrote: > My apologies for taking so long on this. Digging through gcc history > isn't exactly fun :) No problem. Thanks for tackling the issue. > Ok, so it seems -mcpu=440 was added in gcc 3.4. The -mcpu=405 option > has been around since 2001. See

Re: compile quirk linux-2.6.24 (with workaround)

2008-02-18 Thread Josh Boyer
On Tue, 5 Feb 2008 09:38:20 -0600 Josh Boyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, 5 Feb 2008 08:24:38 -0700 > "Grant Likely" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On 2/5/08, Josh Boyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I mean, if you have not included 4xx support in the kernel, as is the > > > > case

Re: compile quirk linux-2.6.24 (with workaround)

2008-02-06 Thread Bernhard Reiter
On Tuesday 05 February 2008 16:38, Josh Boyer wrote: > > That would mean we're dropping support for compilers which can't build > > 405/440 specific wrapper bits (or other core specific quirks that need > > to go in the wrapper)  That doesn't sound appropriate to me. I agree. Note that dropping su

Re: compile quirk linux-2.6.24 (with workaround)

2008-02-05 Thread Olof Johansson
On Tue, Feb 05, 2008 at 09:38:20AM -0600, Josh Boyer wrote: > Taking a step back though, there will always be odd cases like this as > we move forward. Toolchain XXX will eventually not support instruction > which will eventually be used, etc. I'll try to make this > specific case work beca

Re: compile quirk linux-2.6.24 (with workaround)

2008-02-05 Thread Josh Boyer
On Tue, 5 Feb 2008 08:24:38 -0700 "Grant Likely" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 2/5/08, Josh Boyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I mean, if you have not included 4xx support in the kernel, as is the > > > case here, it does not make sense to add the 4xx bootwrapper code, no ? > > > > It does,

Re: compile quirk linux-2.6.24 (with workaround)

2008-02-05 Thread Grant Likely
On 2/5/08, Josh Boyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I mean, if you have not included 4xx support in the kernel, as is the > > case here, it does not make sense to add the 4xx bootwrapper code, no ? > > It does, in a manner. There are both generic and platform specific > pieces to the bootwrapper.

Re: compile quirk linux-2.6.24 (with workaround)

2008-02-05 Thread Josh Boyer
On Tue, 5 Feb 2008 15:39:26 +0100 Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, Feb 05, 2008 at 07:08:33AM -0600, Josh Boyer wrote: > > On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 10:51:21 +0100 > > Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > On Sun, Feb 03, 2008 at 05:29:05PM +0100, Bernhard Reiter wrote: > > >

Re: compile quirk linux-2.6.24 (with workaround)

2008-02-05 Thread Josh Boyer
On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 10:51:21 +0100 Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, Feb 03, 2008 at 05:29:05PM +0100, Bernhard Reiter wrote: > > Dear linux powerpc Maintainers and Users, > > > > recently I have tried to compile a new kernel on a Debian sarge ppc > > system (PowerBook5,6 MacRISC3 P

Re: compile quirk linux-2.6.24 (with workaround)

2008-02-04 Thread Josh Boyer
On Sun, 3 Feb 2008 17:29:05 +0100 Bernhard Reiter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Dear linux powerpc Maintainers and Users, > > recently I have tried to compile a new kernel on a Debian sarge ppc > system (PowerBook5,6 MacRISC3 Power Macintosh). > > The build system bailed out with >BOOTCC

Re: compile quirk linux-2.6.24 (with workaround)

2008-02-04 Thread Grant Likely
On 2/4/08, Bernhard Reiter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Monday 04 February 2008 10:51, Sven Luther wrote: > > You should normally not need to build the 4xx bootloader part. Make sure > > that, i don't know why this happens. Can you look into > > arch/powerpc/boot/Makefile, to see what option ena

Re: compile quirk linux-2.6.24 (with workaround)

2008-02-04 Thread Bernhard Reiter
On Monday 04 February 2008 10:51, Sven Luther wrote: > On Sun, Feb 03, 2008 at 05:29:05PM +0100, Bernhard Reiter wrote: > > Dear linux powerpc Maintainers and Users, > > > > recently I have tried to compile a new kernel on a Debian sarge ppc > > system (PowerBook5,6 MacRISC3 Power Macintosh). > > T

compile quirk linux-2.6.24 (with workaround)

2008-02-03 Thread Bernhard Reiter
Dear linux powerpc Maintainers and Users, recently I have tried to compile a new kernel on a Debian sarge ppc system (PowerBook5,6 MacRISC3 Power Macintosh). The build system bailed out with BOOTCC arch/powerpc/boot/4xx.o cc1: error: bad value (440) for -mcpu= switch make[