Re: Does XFS require DevFs?

[Seth Mos <knuffie@xs4all.nl>]

At 01:20 15-6-2001 -0400, Joseph Fannin wrote:
>On Thu, Jun 14, 2001 at 06:31:14PM -0400, Joseph Fannin wrote:
> >      I've searched the archives but found no answer to this question:
> > Does XFS require DevFS?  Or can I build a kernel for my system
> > (installed from the XFS RH7.1 .iso) that does not include devfs
> > without having problems?
> >
> >     I've been completely unable to build a working kernel using either
> > the RH-2.96 or egcs -- the build either fails or gives me a kernel
> > that produces random segfaults, oopsen, and fs corruption.  I've tried
> > the .src.rpm on the .iso, the 2.4.3 patches and the CVS devel tree.
> >
>
>     Thanks you everyone for your replies, and for putting up with my
>frustration.  Now that I know that my problem wasn't a misconfiguration
>I have built two kernels now with xfs support -- v2.4.3 with the 1.0
>release patches, built with egcs.  Both machines appear to be working fine.
>
>     The problem was definitely compiler related -- even the latest release
>of 2.96 didn't work for me, though I read somewhere that it did.  The
>redhat-patched kernel in the src.rpm didn't build with egcs (kgcc) but
>a vanilla 2.4.3 with xfs patches applied built fine.  RedHat builds and
>tests their kernels with 2.96, so I suspect one of their patches doesn't
>like egcs.  (The failure was an "internal compiler error" that happened
>twice, the second again in the same place, after a `make clean`)

Internal compiler errors are mostly related to some sort of hardware failure.
It just does not say what.

>    The other build failures I got were likely due to a combination of fs
>corruption (there were some complaints about missing files) and the wrong
>compiler.  The hardware on this machine is solid, though I have another with
>flaky memory; the problem was 100% gcc-2.96.  So don't use it for XFS
>kernels.  :-)

That is known and is in the FAQ afaik.


--
Seth
Every program has two purposes one for which
it was written and another for which it wasn't
I use the last kind.