Re: 2.6.18-mm1 compile failure on x86_64

[Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>]

Andy Whitcroft wrote:
> Martin Bligh wrote:
>   
> > http://test.kernel.org/abat/49037/debug/test.log.0   
> >
> >   AS      arch/x86_64/boot/bootsect.o
> >   LD      arch/x86_64/boot/bootsect
> >   AS      arch/x86_64/boot/setup.o
> >   LD      arch/x86_64/boot/setup
> >   AS      arch/x86_64/boot/compressed/head.o
> >   CC      arch/x86_64/boot/compressed/misc.o
> >   OBJCOPY arch/x86_64/boot/compressed/vmlinux.bin
> > BFD: Warning: Writing section `.data.percpu' to huge (ie negative) file
> > offset 0x804700c0.
> > /usr/local/autobench/sources/x86_64-cross/gcc-3.4.0-glibc-2.3.2/bin/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu-objcopy:
> > arch/x86_64/boot/compressed/vmlinux.bin: File truncated
> > make[2]: *** [arch/x86_64/boot/compressed/vmlinux.bin] Error 1
> > make[1]: *** [arch/x86_64/boot/compressed/vmlinux] Error 2
> > make: *** [bzImage] Error 2
> > 09/25/06-09:13:48 Build the kernel. Failed rc = 2
> > 09/25/06-09:13:49 build: kernel build Failed rc = 1
> >
> > Wierd. Same box compiled 2.6.18 fine.
> >     
>
> Pretty sure this isn't a space problem, as we have just checked space
> before the build and I've taken no action since then.  Someone did
> mention "tool chain issue" when it was first spotted.  Will check with
> them and see why they thought that.
>   

Does this box have an older version of binutils (2.15?)?  If so, it 
might be getting upset over the patch "note-section" in Andi's queue.  I 
know it has been a bit problematic, but I don't know if the problems 
manifest in this way.

   J
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/