| 1 |
I encountered the same error when building uclibc-0.9.28 using 'xmerge'. |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
You're right, there should be some way to specify the kernel version for |
| 4 |
uclibc in the case that UTS_RELEASE isn't declared in |
| 5 |
include/linux/version.h |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
Has there been any new development? |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
~/Chris |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
thomas.cooksey@××.com wrote: |
| 12 |
> I'm trying to use crossdev to generate a toolchain for an |
| 13 |
> arm-softfloat-linux-uclibc target. I'm using the following versions: |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> binutils 2.17 |
| 16 |
> gcc 3.4.5 |
| 17 |
> kernel 2.6.18 |
| 18 |
> libc 0.9.28-r1 |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> The command I'm using is: |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> USE="-*" UCLIBC_CPU=ARM_XSCALE crossdev --binutils 2.17 --gcc 3.4.5 |
| 23 |
> --kernel 2.6.18 --libc 0.9.28-r1 --target arm-softfloat-linux-uclibc |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> The build fails on uclibc at the point it runs the fix_includes.sh |
| 26 |
> script, which fails saying "Unable to determine version for kernel |
| 27 |
> headers". I've looked at the version.h in the |
| 28 |
> /usr/arm-softfloat-linux-uclibc/usr/include/linux directory and it is |
| 29 |
> indeed missing the UTS_RELEASE define. If you edit version.h and add |
| 30 |
> "#define UST_RELEASE "2.6.18foo"", the build runs through to the end |
| 31 |
> (although I've not had chance to test the binaries it outputs yet). |
| 32 |
> |
| 33 |
> Editing the version.h file by hand feels like a bit of a bodge. Is there |
| 34 |
> a fix for this? E.g. by adding a use flag I don't know about? |
| 35 |
> |
| 36 |
> |
| 37 |
> |
| 38 |
> Cheers, |
| 39 |
> |
| 40 |
> Tom |
| 41 |
> |
| 42 |
> |
| 43 |
> |
| 44 |
-- |
| 45 |
gentoo-embedded@g.o mailing list |
Archives