Re: [gentoo-user] make of gentoo-sources-3.2.12 fails

[Michael Scherer <a6702894@unet.univie.ac.at>]

On Fri, 11 May 2012 01:18:18 -0400
Joshua Murphy <poisonbl@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 9:01 PM, Michael Scherer
> <a6702894@unet.univie.ac.at> wrote:
> > I'm always replying to gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org and I'm not
> > aware I ever used
> > one of the addresses you mentioned below. I'm rather new to this
> > forum, so it's
> > entirely possible I did something wrong somewhere, so please tell
> > me where else
> > I should post my replies.
> > And if you feel the urge to correct me on my postings you might as
> > well post some
> > advice on my problem too.
> >
> >
> > michael
> >
> > --
> > Michael Scherer
> > Univ.klinik f. Psychiatrie
> > email: michael.scherer@meduniwien.ac.at
> > phone: +43 6991 941 22 54
> >
> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stroller"
> >> <stroller@stellar.eclipse.co.uk>
> >> To: <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>
> >> Sent: Thursday, 10 May, 2012 23:08
> >>
> >> Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] make of gentoo-sources-3.2.12 fails
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 10 May 2012, at 15:20, Michael Scherer wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> References: <4FAA2F0D.8080900@gmail.com>
> >>>        <4FAA595A.4040202@libertytrek.org>
> >>>
> >>>  <CAK2H+ec30vQ09U22vAc72hSQBJb2ZN5b25snH6-D3cDXrReHSA@mail.gmail.com>
> >>>
> >>>  <CAA2qdGW8UuF3H-CBiqn48f+Pboj3AhCT2WhDd1SwzE-g7z_MJg@mail.gmail.com>
> >>>
> >>> after downloading the 3.2.12-sources everything went fine
> >>> for a couple of weeks, I compiled them a couple of times,
> >>> but suddenly, maybe because of some world-updates, errors
> >>> started to accumulate, …
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Please don't hijack threads like this:
> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thread_hijacking
> >> http://groups.google.com/group/linux.gentoo.user/msg/8a540add45e7e9b8?
> >>
> >> "It is irritating for people using thread-aware e-mail clients...
> >> In case you didn't know, it happens when you use "reply" for
> >> sending a new question instead of composing a "new" message."
> >>
> >> Stroller.
> >>
> >>
> 
> He pulled those addresses from the message headers that went out with
> your initial question, which it appears you sent, aiming to start a
> new thread of discussion on, by hitting reply in the midst of
> "[gentoo-user] Are those "green" drives any good?" and changing the
> subject. It's a quick way to get a message headed towards the list,
> but it *does* throw clients that are better at thread tracking for a
> bit of a loop (and makes it easy for your question to get lost in an
> already 40+ message long thread). As for your initial question,
> building from your config on a clean (distclean, no ccache, etc)
> 3.1.12 gentoo patched tree built rather quick and problem free on my
> box here (using -j5 at that. My first guess was a race issue in a
> parallel build)... You might find something notably different in your
> versions of things, so here's what I'm running on there.
> 
> lanos linux-3.2.12-gentoo # emerge --info
> Portage 2.1.10.49 (default/linux/amd64/10.0, gcc-4.5.3,
> glibc-2.14.1-r3, 3.2.1-gentoo-r2-lanos x86_64)
> =================================================================
> System uname:
> Linux-3.2.1-gentoo-r2-lanos-x86_64-Intel-R-_Core-TM-2_Quad_CPU_Q6600_@_2.40GHz-with-gentoo-2.0.3
> Timestamp of tree: Mon, 07 May 2012 17:30:01 +0000
> app-shells/bash:          4.2_p20 dev-lang/python:          2.7.2-r3,
> 3.1.4-r3, 3.2.2 dev-util/pkgconfig:       0.26
> sys-apps/baselayout:      2.0.3
> sys-apps/openrc:          0.9.8.4
> sys-apps/sandbox:         2.5
> sys-devel/autoconf:       2.13, 2.68
> sys-devel/automake:       1.11.1
> sys-devel/binutils:       2.21.1-r1
> sys-devel/gcc:            4.5.3-r2
> sys-devel/gcc-config:     1.5-r2
> sys-devel/libtool:        2.4-r1
> sys-devel/make:           3.82-r1
> sys-kernel/linux-headers: 3.1 (virtual/os-headers)
> sys-libs/glibc:           2.14.1-r3
> 
> If you're running something newer somewhere, or vanilla-sources, or
> somesuch I can poke around a bit and see if I can replicate your
> troubles here, but I can't guarantee short timeframes... I've around
> 1k miles of travelling this weekend, half of which will be learning
> quickly whether the car I just grabbed on ebay was a good idea or not.
> 

I have the exact same hard- and software as described in your list,
but the result doesn't change. Below is the command that should create
mounts.o but for some reason can't make it:

init/.do_mounts.o.cmd:cmd_init/do_mounts.o := gcc -Wp,-MD,init/.do_mounts.o.d  -nostdinc -isystem /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/4.5.3/include -I/usr/src/linux-3.2.12-gentoo/arch/x86/include -Iarch/x86/include/generated -Iinclude  -include /usr/src/linux-3.2.12-gentoo/include/linux/kconfig.h -D__KERNEL__ -Wall -Wundef -Wstrict-prototypes -Wno-trigraphs -fno-strict-aliasing -fno-common -Werror-implicit-function-declaration -Wno-format-security -fno-delete-null-pointer-checks -O2 -m64 -march=k8 -mno-red-zone -mcmodel=kernel -funit-at-a-time -maccumulate-outgoing-args -fstack-protector -DCONFIG_AS_CFI=1 -DCONFIG_AS_CFI_SIGNAL_FRAME=1 -DCONFIG_AS_CFI_SECTIONS=1 -DCONFIG_AS_FXSAVEQ=1 -pipe -Wno-sign-compare -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables -mno-sse -mno-mmx -mno-sse2 -mno-3dnow -Wframe-larger-than=2048 -fno-omit-frame-pointer -fno-optimize-sibling-calls -fno-inline-functions-called-once -Wdeclaration-after-statement -Wno-pointer-sign -fno-strict-overflow -fconserve-stack -DCC_HAVE_ASM_GOTO    -D"KBUILD_STR(s)=\#s" -D"KBUILD_BASENAME=KBUILD_STR(do_mounts)"  -D"KBUILD_MODNAME=KBUILD_STR(mounts)" -c -o init/do_mounts.o init/do_mounts.c

The define for making mounts.o is there, but maybe you can find
something wrong where I can't.

Thanks

michael