Honored Contributor
Honored Contributor
i think 2.6.12 looks better than .16 - it hasn't failed on me yet. the patches you gave me were a bit messy though, i think maybe some things were missing. i also get these warnings on every single file compiled:
in file included from /share/nios2/tmp/linux-2.6.12/include/linux/sched.h:17,
from /share/nios2/tmp/linux-2.6.12/include/linux/module.h:10,
from /share/nios2/tmp/linux-2.6.12/init/version.c:10:
/share/nios2/tmp/linux-2.6.12/include/linux/nodemask.h: in function `__first_unset_node':
/share/nios2/tmp/linux-2.6.12/include/linux/nodemask.h:250: warning: passing arg 1 of `find_next_zero_bit' discards qualifiers from pointer target type
page allocation failures is one thing, but i'm more worried about the kernel hanging completely like .16 was doing. i also have a feeling it's the busybox version. i noticed that in 1.1.1, the file utilities were a bit messed up. for example, here is the output from a normal 'df -h':
# busybox_old df -h
filesystem size used available use% mounted on
/dev/ram0 235.0k 14.0k 221.0k 6% /var
/dev/ram1 235.0k 13.0k 222.0k 6% /tmp
/dev/hda1 14.5m 12.3m 1.5m 89% /mnt/cf#
here is the output of 1.1.1 df -h:
# df -h
filesystem size used available use% mounted on
/dev/ram0 235.0k 14.0k 221.0k 6% (null)
/dev/ram1 235.0k 13.0k 222.0k 6% (null)
/dev/hda1 14.5m 12.3m 1.5m 89% (null)#
all the filesystem utilities, like mke2fs, du, e2fsck, are weird like this. i will keep playing around with 2.6.12 and see what happens.
<div align='right'><{post_snapback}> (index.php?act=findpost&pid=14295)
--- quote end ---
--- Quote End --- Nice to get a new track. The busybox of 20060320 is very close to the official release 1.1.1 . I didn't find problem like yours. I wonder if you are editing on Windows, so that CRLF may cause problems to patch. Try "patch -l" to ignore white space. I will check the 2.6.12 patch files again.
