Re: success 2.4.0-test8 with latest bk
From: Iain Sandoe <hidden>
Date: 2000-09-13 15:56:28
On Wed, Sep 13, 2000, Michel Dänzer wrote:
Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:quoted
quoted
quoted
quoted
You are lucky. For me it stops booting after the "freeing unused kernel memory" line. The one from 2 days ago had 2 days uptime.Usually this means that some function/data is marked __init while itmust not.quoted
Quick verification: #undef __init / #define __init etc. Just wondering: wouldn't it be possible to write some tool to find suchbugs? Update: After a recompilation with today's updates, the latest bk kernel boots again for me.That's not the first time I notice this strange behaviour. I meant, this happened to me randomly with various bk kernels for monthes. The problem usually disappeared by itself after either recompiling the entire kernel, or changing a few unrelated lines of code and then reompiling. That's weird, I really don't know what can be causing that.Broken dependencies?
un-init vars? there's still quite a few warning messages fly by on compile... ===== from a mrproper of rsync-ed bk-devel (13:00 BST today). boots OK (with BootX) on: G3/beige Lombard 9600/233 All three platforms show the weird coloured patterning on graphics chip probe (I guess) - *even* the 9600 - which is IMSTT-based. I have rage128 support built in. 2.4.0-t8 appears to be 'slower and choppier' than 2.2.17p20 (rather subjective, I know). The 9600 leaves the mac hardware cursor on the screen - which doesn't happen with 2.2.17 (who deals with that?)... BTW: two other questions: 1/ is devfs regarded as OK now (I built it in by mistake). 2/ has the fs-trashing problem been resolved? I'd like to get back to doing 2.4.0 versions of the bits I'm working on - but have only a little time for watching fsck ;-) Iain. ** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/