[K42-discussion] What is the correct version of gcc, glibc, binutils, linux and linuxthreads required for a successful K42 build ?
Nathan Sweet
nsweet at cs.unm.edu
Fri Dec 23 08:55:51 EST 2005
Okay, done. I added a section to this page:
http://k42.ozlabs.org/Wiki/BuildingK42
and attached the script and instructions for its use. I would've got it
up sooner, but I decided to consolidate the two scripts I wrote into
one, which should hopefully make it easier to use.
Since the script also runs K42 on Mambo, I added a note on this page:
http://k42.ozlabs.org/Wiki/RunningK42Mambo
which links back to the first one.
Nathan
Orran Y Krieger wrote:
>
> Nathan, these scripts sound pretty useful, want to add a page to the
> K42 wicki with all the UNM stuff you have so others can grab it?
>
>
> *Nathan Sweet <nsweet at cs.unm.edu>*
> Sent by: k42-discussion-bounces at ozlabs.org
>
> 12/20/2005 02:29 PM
>
>
> To
> k42-discussion at ozlabs.org
> cc
>
> Subject
> Re: [K42-discussion] What is the correct version of gcc, glibc,
> binutils, linux and linuxthreads required for a successful K42 build ?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Elvis,
>
> If I remember correctly, Fedora Core 4 uses gcc 4, which doesn't work
> (or, at least, it didn't when I tried it 4 months ago). Installing
> the gcc compat packages might work. Those are version 3.2, I believe.
> Take it with a grain of salt, however, as I never tried it and I
> found it a lot easier to set up Ubuntu 5.04 (which uses gcc 3.5) on a
> separate partition to do any K42 related work.
>
> Eventually, I created scripts to build and run K42 on systemsim to
> facilitate the process for other students here. That way the students
> don't have to worry about which environment variables need to be
> defined for building and/or running. I'll post a link to them later
> once I make sure they're updated. You're free to peruse them and
> adapt them to your needs.
>
> Orran Y Krieger wrote:
>
> Hopefully Andrew, someone from UNM or Toronto, or Amos or Michal or
> Jimi can answere this. I am blisfully ignorant and use the tools
> provided for me by others on the team :-)
>
> *"Elvis John Dowson" **_<elvis_dowson at hotmail.com>_*
> <mailto:elvis_dowson at hotmail.com>
>
> 12/20/2005 01:23 PM
>
>
> To
> Orran Y Krieger/Watson/IBM at IBMUS
> cc
> "'Andrew Baumann'" _<andrewb at cse.unsw.edu.au>_
> <mailto:andrewb at cse.unsw.edu.au>, "'Jimi Xenidis'"
> _<jimix at watson.ibm.com>_ <mailto:jimix at watson.ibm.com>,
> _<k42-discussion at ozlabs.org>_ <mailto:k42-discussion at ozlabs.org>
> Subject
> RE: [K42-discussion] What is the correct version of gcc, glibc,
> binutils, linux and linuxthreads required for a successful K42 build ?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi,
> So, if I download and install the following packages, then K42
> will compile correctly under Fedora Core 4 ?
> _
> __http://www.cs.unm.edu/~k42/pub/k42-devkit/k42-toolchain_0.1.0.orig.tar.gz_
> <http://www.cs.unm.edu/%7Ek42/pub/k42-devkit/k42-toolchain_0.1.0.orig.tar.gz>
> _
> __http://www.cs.unm.edu/~k42/pub/k42-devkit/k42-packages_0.5.4.orig.tar.gz_
> <http://www.cs.unm.edu/%7Ek42/pub/k42-devkit/k42-packages_0.5.4.origtar.gz>
> _
> __http://www.cs.unm.edu/~k42/pub/k42-devkit/k42-devkit_0.2.0.orig.tar.gz_
> <http://www.cs.unm.edu/%7Ek42/pub/k42-devkit/k42-devkit_0.2.0.orig.tar.gz>
>
>
> I have already downloaded the latest K42 sources from the CVS repository.
>
> Thank you and do let me know !
>
> Best regards,
>
> Elvis Dowson
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *
> From:* Orran Y Krieger [_mailto:okrieg at us.ibm.com_] *
> Sent:* Tuesday, December 20, 2005 10:40 PM*
> To:* Elvis John Dowson*
> Cc:* 'Andrew Baumann'; 'Jimi Xenidis'; _k42-discussion at ozlabs.org_
> <mailto:k42-discussion at ozlabs.org>;
> _k42-discussion-bounces at ozlabs.org_
> <mailto:k42-discussion-bounces at ozlabs.org>; 'Andrew Baumann'; 'Jimi
> Xenidis'; _k42-discussion at ozlabs.org_
> <mailto:k42-discussion at ozlabs.org>;
> _k42-discussion-bounces at ozlabs.org_
> <mailto:k42-discussion-bounces at ozlabs.org>*
> Subject:* RE: [K42-discussion] What is the correct version of gcc,
> glibc, binutils, linux and linuxthreads required for a successful K42
> build ?
>
>
> Elvis,
>
> There is perhaps some confusion here. K42 is intimate with a
> particular toolchain version (e.g., we know how virtual function
> tables are laid out for our stub compiler), and that toolchain has to
> be built a specific way to be able to build K42. Its a pretty major
> project to build the toolchain, its got nothing whatsoever to do with
> building the K42 kernel, and most people that want to hack on K42 want
> to know nothing about building the toolchain. Once you have the
> toolchain, building K42 is relatively straightforward. We have tried
> to do a reasonable job of documenting how to build K42 itself. If
> you want to work/play on the OS, really the best bet today is to just
> use the binary version of the toolchain that is distributed at UNM and
> Toronto. If you want to build your own version... its digging into a
> big pit.
>
> Unfortunately, the toolchain problem is agrevated by the fact that we
> are locked into an older version of the toolchain. With more recent
> vesions the kind of scripts that the Cell guys use would work for us
> as well. Someone at the university of new mexico agreed a while back
> to work on upgrading us to a new version of the toolchain, but have
> not heard anything about that recently? Any progress on this guys?
>
> -- Orran
>
> *"Elvis John Dowson" **_<elvis_dowson at hotmail.com>_*
> <mailto:elvis_dowson at hotmail.com>
> Sent by: _k42-discussion-bounces at ozlabs.org_
> <mailto:k42-discussion-bounces at ozlabs.org>
>
> 12/18/2005 07:07 PM
>
>
> To
> "'Andrew Baumann'" _<andrewb at cse.unsw.edu.au>_
> <mailto:andrewb at cse.unsw.edu.au>, "'Jimi Xenidis'"
> _<jimix at watson.ibm.com>_ <mailto:jimix at watson.ibm.com>
> cc
> _k42-discussion at ozlabs.org_ <mailto:k42-discussion at ozlabs.org>
> Subject
> RE: [K42-discussion] What is the correct version of gcc, glibc,
> binutils, linux and linuxthreads required for a successful K42 build ?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi,
> I would like to learn how to build it from scratch and from the cvs
> sources.
>
> One thing I can say for certain, the present documentation and
> distribution
> mode is completely unworkable.
>
> I'm using a Linux Fedora Core 4 distribution. All the build.sh scripts
> that
> I tried using doesnt work. I even tried various compatible builds of gcc,
> glibc, etc, known to match with the linux kernel and still it doesnt build
> correctly.
>
> To top it all, I dont have the bitkeeper program or the bk command.
> Searching the net, I read about the bitkeeper controversy. They sent me a
> link to a bkbits client, build it didnt have a bk command utility after I
> built the sources.
>
> So I can even follow the instructions give below to patch the kernel even,
> as posted on the K42-Tornado Operating System website :_
> __http://www.eecg.toronto.edu/~tornado/#overview_
> <http://www.eecg.toronto.edu/%7Etornado/#overview>
>
> Linux patches for the K42 target architecture:
> ----------------------------------------------
> patch25.bz2
> patch26.bz2
> patch26b.bz2 - Apply this patch on top of the patch26.bz2 patch using:
> bzip2 -dc patch26b.bz2 | bk receive -a linux-026
>
> All in all, quite unworkable and badly supported as a distribution. I've
> spend more than 4 days (18 hours a day for a total of 72 hours) straight,
> starting from scratch, to attempt to build the K42 sources, with no
> results,
> so far).
>
> The Cell SystemSim distribution was much cleaner and I could resolve
> all the
> build dependencies easily, with less effort. With K42, it doesnt seem
> to be
> the case.
>
> I've downloaded the document sources and built the html files, that
> was kind
> of amusing by the way, when compared to a windows development
> environment,... I mean I wasted so much time, just to figure out that
> I had
> to build the html files from SGML sources !! That was crazy. I mean, you
> guys must be wasting so much time with the infrastructure, support
> structure
> and the organization of this entire project. The results were quite
> nice and
> fancy in the end, but I think one tends to get into nitty gritty
> details and
> lose sight of the forest from the trees, if you know what I mean.
>
> I guess once you get it working, it would be good, but for me, the initial
> experience is not good, for the moment, for no reason other than having
> outdated documentation for the build process.
>
> I come from a DO-178B real-time embedded avionics software development
> background and have worked on a variety of platforms and tools, plus
> scientific engineering aerospace application development and OpenGL.
>
> All those environments, platforms and tools were fairly straightforward to
> work with and the time spend learning would directly map to results for a
> given task.
>
> Here, I feel it's time wasted on unproductive tasks that do not lend
> itself
> towards getting results for a given task (case in point, building the
> documentation set from the sgml files, outdated and scattered build
> instructions, problems with tools (bitkeeper), incomplete
> distributions and
> supplied toolsets ( no netap host application for recieving simulator
> network interface broadcast packets, etc )
>
> I think its easy for someone internally at IBM to do all the development,
> but for an external developer, the state of the distribution is quite
> unworkable. Agreed that you have pre-built distributions that are 500MB
> large, but I should also be able to build from the sources too.
>
> Anyway, I'm just telling you all this to let you know how I feel, in the
> hope that sometime in the future you could address some of these
> points, so
> that the experience is better for someone attempting to work on the K42
> project, externally, other than the internal IBM development team.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Elvis Dowson
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew Baumann [_mailto:andrewb at cse.unsw.edu.au_]
> Sent: Monday, December 19, 2005 3:11 AM
> To: Elvis John Dowson
> Cc: _k42-discussion at ozlabs.org_ <mailto:k42-discussion at ozlabs.org>
> Subject: Re: [K42-discussion] What is the correct version of gcc, glibc,
> binutils, linux and linuxthreads required for a successful K42 build ?
>
> On Sun, 18 Dec 2005 11:16 pm, Elvis John Dowson wrote:
> > Would it be possible for someone to tell me which version of gcc, glibc,
> > binutils, linux, linuxthreads and patches are required for a successful
> K42
> > build ?
>
> Building a toolchain and all the supporting software for use with K42
> isn't
> exactly easy. If you can, I strongly suggest using one of Amos
> Waterland's
> K42 toolchain/library packages (for i386) from here:_
> __http://www.cs.unm.edu/~k42/pub/k42-devkit_
> <http://www.cs.unm.edu/%7Ek42/pub/k42-devkit>
>
> As for versions, in that package are a gcc-3.3.3 prerelease,
> binutils-2.14.90,
> and glibc 2.3.2. The version of linux being used is specific to K42,
> so you
> definitely need to get that from the k42-packages tree.
>
> Andrew
> _______________________________________________
> K42-discussion mailing list_
> __K42-discussion at ozlabs.org_ <mailto:K42-discussion at ozlabs.org>_
> __https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/k42-discussion_
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> K42-discussion mailing list
> _K42-discussion at ozlabs.org_ <mailto:K42-discussion at ozlabs.org>
> _https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/k42-discussion_
>
> _______________________________________________
> K42-discussion mailing list
> K42-discussion at ozlabs.org
> https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/k42-discussion
>
More information about the K42-discussion
mailing list