make config errors while building kernel on Fedora 16
Hi I tried to build both linux mainline and linux-next on my Fedora 16 box. But in both cases I am running into errors in making the .config Here is a what is written (partial from top) to stdout: *** Default configuration is based on 'x86_64_defconfig' init/Kconfig:237:warning: multi-line strings not supported kernel/irq/Kconfig:75:warning: multi-line strings not supported init/Kconfig:667:warning: multi-line strings not supported init/Kconfig:1216:warning: multi-line strings not supported init/Kconfig:1307:warning: multi-line strings not supported init/Kconfig:1308:warning: multi-line strings not supported And the following (partial from bottom) to stderr: drivers/vhost/Kconfig:10: syntax error drivers/vhost/Kconfig:9: unknown option "To" drivers/vhost/Kconfig:10: unknown option "be" drivers/lguest/Kconfig:12: syntax error drivers/lguest/Kconfig:11: unknown option "Note" drivers/lguest/Kconfig:12: unknown option "not" drivers/lguest/Kconfig:15: syntax error drivers/lguest/Kconfig:14: unknown option "If" lib/xz/Kconfig:59: syntax error lib/xz/Kconfig:58: unknown option "Unless" lib/xz/Kconfig:59: unknown option "and" lib/Kconfig:281: syntax error lib/Kconfig:280: unknown option "If" make[1]: *** [defconfig] Error 1 make: *** [defconfig] Error 2 I have verified that I have buildtools, kernel-devel and header packages. And last month I had built the kernel (mainline) for first time on Linux Mint. But here, probably, I am missing something completely. Google search didn't help much either. -- Kartik http://k4rtik.wordpress.com/
Hi... On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 12:11, Kartik Singhal <kartiksinghal@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi
I tried to build both linux mainline and linux-next on my Fedora 16 box. But in both cases I am running into errors in making the .config
There are two things I'd like to suggest: 1. Are you sure your downloaded file is correct? have you check their checksums? 2. can you show us exactly how do you do compilation?
From the error, roughly, I think there were typos here and there. They could come from the original patch submitter, or something mangle the strings...
-- regards, Mulyadi Santosa Freelance Linux trainer and consultant blog: the-hydra.blogspot.com training: mulyaditraining.blogspot.com
Hi, Now I have switched to using request_firmware api and after using firmware, memory is being released. Does it save kernel memory compare to case when I am having a having a local static firmware buffer(very big) from which I used to get the firmware and write it to the chip? As I know request_firmware api has several advantages but what I want to know is the advantages related to kernel memory footprint. Thanks for the help. ps:I asked the same question in #kernelnewbies IRC
On Tue, Feb 07, 2012 at 12:51:42AM -0800, anish kumar wrote:
Hi,
Now I have switched to using request_firmware api and after using firmware, memory is being released. Does it save kernel memory compare to case when I am having a having a local static firmware buffer(very big) from which I used to get the firmware and write it to the chip?
As I know request_firmware api has several advantages but what I want to know is the advantages related to kernel memory footprint.
Yes it is, as well as using the "proper" api for firmware loading, which means it fits into the rest of the kernel correctly. Also, no new drivers will be accepted that have static firmware blobs. greg k-h
On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 1:05 PM, Mulyadi Santosa <mulyadi.santosa@gmail.com>wrote:
have you check their checksums?
Is there a way to verify the checksums for git clones as in my case? -- Kartik http://k4rtik.wordpress.com/
participants (4)
-
anish kumar -
Greg KH -
Kartik Singhal -
Mulyadi Santosa