clubneon <clubneon@clubneon.com> writes:
>
> Today I did write a scipt that unpacked the kernel tree, copied a .config
> file over, and then did a "make oldconfig dep bzImage" and then deleted
> the tree and started over. I let it run for about an hour. No problems.
>
> I then did a "make bootstrap" of gcc 2.95.2. No problems. I then built
> "binutils" and "make". I followed that up with OpenSSL and OpenSSH. No
> problems.
[ . . . ]
> So feeling lucky, I went back to "glibc" one more time. BOOM! Missing
> file, try agian, missing file, try again, segfault, try again, oops.
Well, you could try switching to a 2.2.xx kernel and compiling
"glibc". It wouldn't be conclusive, but it would certainly greatly
reduce or increase the probability that it's a kernel bug.
> And as I said in another post. One bonnie++ runs fine (and fast). But
> when I tried four concurrent bonnie++s. Oops.
Could this be the difference between the "glibc" and other compiles?
Perhaps "glibc", by default, does a parallel make? Does the kernel
compilation still work if you pass "-j3" to "make" (or change the line
in the top-level Makefile to "MAKE=make -j3")?
Kevin <buhr@stat.wisc.edu>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Aug 07 2000 - 21:00:12 EST