linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: Tree for March 27

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20080327132221.GA29701@cs181133002.pp.htv.fi>
Date:	Thu, 27 Mar 2008 15:22:21 +0200
From:	Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org>
To:	Jan Dittmer <jdi@....org>
Cc:	Haavard Skinnemoen <haavard.skinnemoen@...el.com>,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	linux-next@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for March 27

On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 01:54:23PM +0100, Jan Dittmer wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 12:54 PM, Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org> wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 12:32:26PM +0100, Haavard Skinnemoen wrote:
> >  > On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 12:47:45 +0200
> >  > Adrian Bunk <bunk@...nel.org> wrote:
> >  >
> >  > > According to Jan's page, there's still a build error with the defconfig:
> >  > >   http://l4x.org/k/?d=40450#err
> >  >
> >  > Hmm...that must be a pretty ancient toolchain.
> 
> That's the toolchain from back when avr32 was first integrated in the
> kernel. So it may be outdated, but I didn't read any statement on
> the contrary. I tend to keep the toolchains stable as long as
> possible.
> 
> >  > FWIW, a more recent toolchain is available here:
> >  >
> >  > http://avr32linux.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/BinutilsPatches
> >  > http://avr32linux.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/GccPatches
> 
> So how can I get notified if I need a more recent toolchain?
> IMHO every architecture should have a file somewhere (in
> the kernel tree) where the required toolchain versions are
> listed and required patches are linked. That would make it
> such discussions unnecessary.

Even more important, all architectures should get all their 
required patches into upstream binutils and gcc.

There might be some time at the beginning of a port until this state is 
reached, but for the majority of our architectures plain upstream
binutils 2.18.50.0.5 and gcc 4.3.0 already give a successful kernel 
build.

And I'm regularly poking arch maintainers to get their binutils and gcc 
patches upstream.

Regarding "required toolchain versions" - I'm not even sure anyone 
really knows what the minimum binutils version for x86 is...

> Jan

cu
Adrian

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed

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