[00:00] Wow! This is the most useless stacktrace I've seen in a while. [00:00] No pointers to where the segfault is happening. [00:01] And cyclical from frame #1, with gdb reporting a corrupt stack. [00:01] hum... [00:01] so probably in ocaml land [00:02] I'm happy to be a robot, but I don't have any idea how to begin to debug this without instructions. [00:05] well... you do have access to the surrounding assembly code, don't you? I would try to find the closest symbol or so [00:06] I'll need guidance for that. I'm good at reading stacktraces, but don't really use GDB as such, beyond as a stacktrace generator. [00:06] I usually use the disassemble command [00:07] I should probably do that myself... is there a quick guide to set up an Ubuntu armel box in qemu? [00:07] Do you need full system emulation, or just userspace emulation? [00:08] I don't know... sothing enough to reproduce the problem [00:08] If the latter, `mk-sbuild --arch=armel --distro=ubuntu oneiric` should do it, from a Debian system [00:08] If the former, you'll need more setup, and I'd have to hunt up a guide. [00:16] W: Failure trying to run: dpkg --force-depends --install /var/cache/apt/archives/libc6_2.13-9ubuntu2_armel.deb [00:17] Oh, right. debootstrap is broken (/run) [00:17] `sudo rm -rf /var/lib/schroot/chroots/oneiric-armel` [00:17] Then `mk-sbuild --arch=armel --distro=ubuntu natty` [00:17] Then `sudo schroot -c natty-armel -uroot` [00:18] Then edit sources.list, and dist-upgrade. [00:18] avoiding libc6? [00:18] It doesn't actually avoid libc6 [00:18] It just avoids the situation that makes libc6 fail to install with debootstrap for oneiric [00:19] Alternately, if you want persistence, edit /var/lib/schroot/chroots/natty-amd64/etc/apt/sources.list, and then enter the natty-armel-source chroot. [00:33] ok, I can reproduce the segfault [00:34] actually, a mere "ocamlfind" segfaults [00:34] but I get in gbd: qemu: Unsupported syscall: 26 [00:35] That's fine. [00:36] We haven't been grilling qemu-user agressively recently, but I believe that support was added for all the syscalls need to build all the packages in the archive. [00:36] Which would include anything necessary to run ocamlfind properly. [00:36] 26 is ptrace [00:36] Mind you, that isn't how we build stuff, but the work was done to enable just the sort of debugging you're doing now. [00:37] Ah, hrm. Maybe running gdb in that environment isn't so reliable :( [00:38] Well, I suppose you could try https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ARM/RootfsFromScratch/QemuDebootstrap [00:39] I've been reminded that there's a buildd chroot available from https://launchpad.net/api/devel/ubuntu/oneiric/armel/chroot_url if you like. [00:39] (or rather, from the URI given at that URL) [00:45] persia: actually, an empty program segfaults [00:45] Empty ocaml program? [00:46] Then I'm confused. [00:46] yes [00:46] Because ocaml didn't change between when it was working and when it wasn't working. [00:46] create an empty file "toto.ml" [00:46] run "ocamlopt toto.ml", then ./a.out [00:46] it segfaults [00:47] File "toto.ml", line 1, characters 0-1:\nError: I/O error: /tmp/camlasm637f94.s: Invalid argument [00:47] persia: with empty toto.ml? [00:47] for me, it compiles [00:47] That's the output from `touch toto.ml; ocamlopt toto.ml` [00:48] so it means that you cannot even compile anything [00:48] apparently. [00:49] I got here by dist-upgrading my natty buildd chroot, and installing ocamlfind. [00:49] Maybe I need to install something else? [00:50] that's what I did [00:51] something must have changed somewhere else [00:51] Between when I did what I did and when you did what you did? There was only a short window. [00:52] And not much has been added to the archive, as folk are trying to fix the /run issue (publishing and buildds are expected to stop being manual any time now) [00:52] no, I meant between 2011-05-20 and 2011-06-28 [00:52] (when ocaml stuff started segfaulting) [00:53] it must be something very fundamental in the toolchain [00:53] Well, we had a successful run on 2011-06-28 ( ocaml-data-notation ), and the failure on 2011-06-29 (oasis) [00:53] There is no difference in the versions of everything in a buildd chroot there. [00:53] Some differences in the build-depends, but nothing that I'd call "fundamental toolchain". [00:54] (as that would be Priority: required or build-essential, or in the complete dependency/recommendation tree of those) [00:55] It was just mpfr4, udev, and apt that differed in the base set. [00:57] it's getting late here [00:57] * sgnb goes to bed [00:57] Sleep well. [00:57] * persia updates the buildlog parsing scripts, and looks for differences in build-dependencies [01:01] Hrm. ocaml-findlib is the only package with a different version. [01:02] Mind you, there are other packages that are present/absent in one or the other build based on differing build-dependencies, but those shouldn't matter for parallel runs of ocamlfind [01:03] well, one should find an oneiric snapshot of 2011-06-28, and try to compile and run a program there [01:03] Dunno if such a thing exists. [01:05] Does anyone happen to have an un-updated chroot including ocaml stuff from June? [01:58] persia: binutils is faulty [01:59] with the version from natty, the empty program works [01:59] hmm? [01:59] persia: was binutils the same between the two builds above? [02:01] Martyn: an empty .ml file compiled with ocamlopt segfaults on armel [02:01] (since ~end of June) [02:01] sgnb, Yes [02:02] http://paste.ubuntu.com/643682/ [02:03] well, the upgrade from 2.21.0.20110327-2ubuntu2 to 2.21.52.20110707-1ubuntu1 did trigger the bug here [02:03] Ah, maybe we have more than one bug. [02:03] Both of those builds were running binutils 2.21.52.20110606-1ubuntu1 [02:04] maybe one of them doesn't run native program at all [02:05] indeed, it seems that ocaml-data-notation doesn't run ocamlfind [02:05] ah no, it does [02:05] strange [02:06] I think that pair of builds is likely the closest in time we'll find between working and not working. [02:06] Everything from oasis on seems to have the same issue. [02:06] well: take a natty chroot, install ocaml-nox, upgrade everything but binutils and gcc, it works, upgrade binutils, and it doesn't [02:06] And this makes me suspect that findlib misbuilt [02:07] Very odd. [02:07] I don't think findlib is involved [02:08] BTW, oneiric can debootstrap again [02:08] What happens if you install https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/oneiric/+source/binutils/2.21.52.20110606-1ubuntu1 ? [02:09] * sgnb really goes to bed now [02:10] heh === Baybal is now known as Baybal32 [02:30] anyone know of a tool to edit the size of a disk image without messing up the data inside? [02:32] Doesn't exist, but there are tools that achieve most of the things that people want to do when they want to do that. [02:32] So, what do you want to do? [02:36] well i have the same img i was working with yesterday... the img size is only 2G i wanna make it 3 [02:37] OK. If I remember correctly, that was a raw filesystem on an image, with no internal partitions or anything. [02:37] right [02:39] * persia grumbles at dd not behaving quite as expected. [02:40] Aha! [02:41] OK, try `dd if=/dev/zero of=my.img bs=1G count=3 && mkfs.ext4 -f my.img && mount -o loop my.img /mnt/new` [02:42] ok kewl imma try one more thing b4 i do that [02:42] thanx again [02:42] Heh, OK :) Note that this creates a 3G image. [02:42] Then you have to copy stuff. [02:43] tar is probably easiest for that. [04:55] 04 or 11.10 work with the arm archictecture here's the link for the dreamplug: http://www.globalscaletechnologies.com/c-5-dreamplugs.aspx [04:55] oops [04:56] i just purchased dreamplug while it has ubuntu downloads my question is will 11.04 or 11.10 work with the arm archictecture here's the link for the dreamplug: http://www.globalscaletechnologies.com/c-5-dreamplugs.aspx [05:00] my fault marvell kirkwood cpu [05:05] anybody here? === MrCurious_ is now known as MrCurious [05:38] lintux, Hey. Ubuntu won't run on that device (although Marvell ships it with their own remix of Ubuntu) [05:39] http://dreamplug.googlecode.com/files/Dreamplug%20-%20Change%20OS%20from%20%20Debian%20to%20Ubuntu-20110615.1.pdf has instructions [05:39] Hrm. Timing :( [05:43] persia: bad timing there [05:44] Indeed. === Baybal is now known as Baybal32 === Baybal is now known as Baybal32 [06:44] Hi [06:47] Whether any netinstall option is avilable for ubuntu-arm [06:48] I mean atleast for building RootFs [06:53] janimo`, you there [07:00] siji, yes [07:00] hi [07:01] I gone through your doc [07:01] regd.devlopers meet [07:01] janimo`, here am working with Beagleboard and ubuntu-arm [07:02] And looking for a small ubuntu footprint version [07:02] (with minimal things) [07:03] So I think netinstall for arm will be good option [07:04] siji, I have never used netinstall so cannot comment on this :) [07:04] ok,now netinstall is not there for ARM [07:05] So why cant you add it in the developers agenda ? [07:27] siji, the session is about package build failures and aimed for those who want to help fix them. It is not about installing Ubuntu on ARM hw [07:28] janimo`, ok [07:29] siji, If you're looking for stable, small-footprint, check out the "headless" images. [07:29] persia, ok [07:30] http://cdimage.ubuntu.com/releases/natty/release/ [07:30] For the beagleboard, you want the "OMAP3" image. [07:30] persia, i have tried those [07:31] The headless one? It wasn't small enough for you? [07:33] Netinstall is only available for oneiric (in-development), at http://ports.ubuntu.com/dists/oneiric/main/installer-armel/current/images/omap/netboot/ [07:33] But it may or may not work, depending on the current state of the archive. [07:35] persia, ok [07:35] let me try that [07:39] Thanks for helping test :) [07:41] persia, actually am in the process of deciding OS for one of our Device [07:43] siji, What sort of device? [07:44] An ubuntu based tablet [07:45] *without android :) [07:45] Oh, cool! That sounds kind of exciting. [07:47] and i strongly prefer ubuntu [07:47] Cool! [10:51] persia: same pb, but it works with the one just before (2.21.51.20110421-6ubuntu1) [11:17] persia: reported it at https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/binutils/+bug/810402 [11:17] Ubuntu bug 810402 in binutils "all native ocaml programs segfault on armel" [Undecided,New] [14:28] persia, my protorype is running with 11.04 now [14:29] Now try to enable touch screen [14:29] 8trying [14:29] *trying [15:02] hello, installing ubuntu-omap4-extras from trunk on ubuntu10.10 i get this error Error! Bad return status for module build on kernel: 2.6.35-903-omap4 (armel) [15:02] Consult the make.log in the build directory [15:02] /var/lib/dkms/pvr-omap4-kernel/1.7~git0f0b25f/build/ for more information. [15:02] Traceback (most recent call last): [15:02] File "/usr/share/apport/package-hooks/dkms.py", line 57, in [15:02] report.write(open(apport.fileutils.make_report_path(report), 'w')) [15:08] mahmoh: GrueMaster: next u-boot upload should have the unique mac address fixed on panda [15:08] thanks to jcrigby [15:08] still building [15:08] Yes, I saw the email. Thanks. [15:08] awesome! [15:09] * mahmoh now has to convince jcrigby to make pxe a default (and /me needs to also investigate a boot failure by the likes of "test" with that setup) [15:14] hey folks.. i just got wlan working on my pandaboard, got a quick q about wpa_supplicant binary vs functions.sh versions... [15:14] basically /etc/wpa_supplicant/functions.sh includes a "-s" parameter when starting the wpa_supplicant daemon [15:14] but this isn't supported by the wpa_supplicant that comes with ubuntu natty [15:15] is this a bug? something wrong on my end? [15:36] NCommander, oh, in case you didnt notice, persia provided a patch for netboot that now also publishes the MLO and u-boot.bin files ... so we have publically available unpacked binaries for both [15:38] lool, so i'm just looking into adding the postinst/trigger bits to flash-kernel, whats the reason you focus on the ABI only in your original patch, shouldnt just the latest existing initrd suffice to get the version without splitting out the ABI [15:38] Still need to post non-uImage versions of the kernel & initrd (or create an abootimg netboot.img) for usbboot. [15:38] GrueMaster, meh, you should have said that when persia wrote the patch ... its just two more lines to the two he added :) [15:39] I noted it back at the rally. [15:39] bug ? [15:39] NCommander was working on the d-i at the time. [15:39] ah [15:39] No one told me persia was working on it. [15:40] he fixed the other issue a few days ago [15:40] spontaneous as response to a user request [15:41] but it was discussed largely in here, probably at a time where you were asleep though [15:42] bug #808810 [15:42] Launchpad bug 808810 in debian-installer "Please publish MLO and u-boot.bin on download page for OMAP netinst" [Wishlist,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/808810 [15:42] I'm guessing that the u-boot that is there is already out of date, given the fix for die-id based mac in pxe. [15:42] well, there was an upload today iirc [15:43] - Generated unique usbethaddr (LP: #809015) [15:43] i guess thats the one [15:45] yep [15:45] so next d-i rebuild then [16:03] GrueMaster, any hint about this? http://dpaste.com/568564/ [16:03] * GrueMaster looks [16:04] I haven't seen that before, but I haven't looked at maverick in quite a while. [16:04] http://dpaste.com/568555/ this is the make.log [16:06] It looks almost like the maverick ppa got clobbered by the natty ppa release. [16:06] robclarck (from ti) sent me here saying [16:06] hmm.. you might want to ask on #ubuntu-arm ... I think there was some PM related API that changed in the kernel.. so when it upgrades the kernel, it tried to rebuild the old pvr kernel module, which failed.. [16:06] I don't remember how to get around that.. I think perhaps remove the sgx packages, then update, then re-install them [16:06] but makes no sense to me [16:06] I'll see if I can reproduce. May take a while though. [16:07] understandable [16:13] Linux panda 2.6.35-903-omap4 #22-Ubuntu SMP PREEMPT Mon Mar 28 17:25:09 UTC 2011 armv7l GNU/Linux [16:13] that is not the trunk update.. which should be 2.6.35-980 [16:13] but the trunk driver ? [16:13] mmmh [16:14] so [16:14] you are saying that i'm not using the up-to-date kernel [16:14] you are using the release kernel [16:14] that's strange [16:14] yeah.. so I guess you end up w/ release kernel, but trunk userspace syslink libs and trunk firmware [16:14] but not the release PPA for pvr [16:15] ok, in which package i have te kernel? [16:15] I seem to remember you need to uninstall pvr/sgx stuff to update.. otherwise the upgrade gets blocked by dkms compile error [16:15] linx-omap4 should be the metapackage pulling in everything [16:15] oh, that might be, could be that dkms is blocking [16:15] uhm uhm [16:16] dpkg drives me mad [16:16] it is a bit ugly, but if you uninstall sgx/pvr stuff first, then upgrade, then re-install [16:16] It may not have updated the boot partition. We have a bug filed about that. [16:16] i've already tryied to uninstall sgx/pvr [16:16] It isn't really dpkg's fault.. [16:16] and upgrade [16:16] Run "sudo flash-kernel" and it should update properly. [16:16] as you said [16:16] GrueMaster, indeed ! [16:16] problem is kernel API that changed, so old pvr kernel module won't compile w/ new kernel headers and visa versa :-( [16:16] why didnt i have that idea ! [16:16] but no newer package were pulled [16:16] also, i tryied to run flash-kernel [16:16] * ogra_ is hacking on exactly that code atm :) [16:18] phas@panda:~$ aptitude show linux-omap4 [16:18] Package: linux-omap4 [16:18] ... [16:18] Version: 2.6.35.903.6 [16:18] ugh, aptotude [16:18] what's wrong with aptitude? [16:18] thats just the meta [16:18] check for the linux-image package [16:19] Version: 2.6.35.903.6 [16:19] (aptitude show linux-image-omap4 ...0 [16:19] LPhas: Make sure you have maverick-updates in /etc/apt/sources.list [16:20] iirc, that was also an issue with maverick. [16:20] GrueMaster, yep, they seems to be there [16:20] dpkg -l|grep linux-image [16:20] try that [16:20] phas@panda:~$ dpkg -l | grep linux-image [16:20] ii linux-image-2.6.35-903-omap4 2.6.35-903.22 Linux kernel image for version 2.6.35 on TI OMAP4-based systems [16:20] ii linux-image-omap4 2.6.35.903.6 Linux kernel image for the OMAP4 architecture. [16:20] k, only 903 [16:21] http://dpaste.com/568569/ sources.list [16:21] hmm, how did you add the PPA [16:22] that looks like manually hacked in, usually ppas end up in sources.list.d [16:22] yep, i put them in manually [16:22] (if you use the right tools) [16:22] well, better follow the instructions next time :) [16:23] wont do harm though [16:23] its intresting that you dont get the new kernel from the trunkl ppa [16:24] robclark, did you not provide a linux-meta package too in there ? [16:24] couldn't i simply download the deb file and dpkg -i into it? [16:24] well, there is a bug we'd like to identify :) [16:25] i get your point [16:26] so there is no -meta package [16:26] thats the issue [16:27] sudo apt-get install linux-image-2.6.35-980-omap4 linux-headers-2.6.35-980 [16:27] try that one [16:30] installing [16:32] ogra_, no idea.. I wasn't really too involved in the deb packaging stuff [16:32] well, thats definitely the blocker [16:33] so i won "i found a bug" t-shirt? [16:33] though its possible that one of the ubuntu-omap4-*-* packages would pull it in [16:42] followup from #pandaboard.... [16:43] LPhas: plz file a bug against the TI natty PPA [16:43] will ping the folks who maintain it to see if they can address it [16:44] uhm [16:44] this is maverick not natty [16:45] and i'm not 100% aware of what happened, not sure at least. [16:45] basically the meta package of linux-omap4 was not updated to include newest linux kernel? [16:46] no [16:46] oops yeah maverick [16:47] there was no metapackage created at all [16:47] sob, now i've x not starting [16:47] the existing one in the archive cant depend on a linux-image outside of the archive [16:47] so someone would have had to create it inside the PPA with a higher version than the archive has [16:48] which didnt happen [16:48] FATAL: Module omap_gpu not found. [16:48] that's strange [16:48] oh, well, i probably got why [17:11] mmh i keep getting omap_gpu not found on startx [17:12] i removed and reinstalled ubuntu_omap4_extra thinking that previous installation compiled modules for the old kernel [17:12] but nothing, it keeps not working [17:20] LPhas: which ppa are you trying to use at maverick? [17:20] release or trunk? [17:20] trunk [17:20] i have to use it [17:20] so you should be using the linux-kernel from trunk [17:20] realease worked fine [17:20] i'am [17:20] if you look at the history [17:21] we found a bug [17:21] that prevent me to automatically get the latest version of the kernel from trunk [17:21] LetoThe2nd: 2.6.35-980.1release9? [17:21] LetoThe2nd: sorry [17:21] LPhas: 2.6.35-980.1release9? [17:22] oh, ok [17:22] yep [17:22] sorry, huge backlog [17:22] i noticed that linux-headers-2.7.35-980-omap4 was not installed [17:22] Interesting. Fresh install of maverick, I am getting dependency failures trying to install ubuntu-omap4-extras. [17:23] GrueMaster: ogra_: LPhas: http://www.omappedia.org/wiki/Ubuntu_OMAP_trunk [17:23] GrueMaster, interesting [17:23] that's why meta wasn't included I believe [17:23] need to update x-loader/u-boot to make it work [17:24] rsalveti, the "update the bootloader" part seems quite overcomplex [17:24] shouldn't just sudo flash-kernel do the trick [17:24] oh, it is intended [17:24] LPhas: not for maverick [17:24] oh my [17:26] Ah, forgot that multiverse & universe were not added by default. yet another bug (and I now remember filing it back in the day). [17:27] well, that is written on a lot of documents online === zyga is now known as zyga-afk [17:48] * GrueMaster signs his life away to the TI liscense agreements in Maverick for the sake of testing. === janimo` is now known as janimo [18:08] jeremiah, ping [18:12] GrueMaster, you read them before clicking, right ?? especially the part talking about your first born i hope :) [18:13] Bah. They can have him [18:13] * GrueMaster is more concerned with the anti-cloning on Titan 6 clause. [18:14] i dont think it says they want him :) [18:14] i might misremember, but i think there was something abotu life long vacancy *g* [18:39] So, about exposing netboot stuff: I tossed in those lines as a whim. The linked branch should make the process fairly obvious if anyone wants to include more files. [18:39] I don't know what needs doing with abootimg to generate the right files for USB: if someone *really* wants to send me code to stick in the file, rather than writing a patch, that works. [18:40] I'm also happy to review someone's patch adding abootimg code for syntax, integration, etc. if someone wants. [18:40] (although I can't commit, so it would be a "looks sane" class of review) [18:42] sgnb, Thanks for filing a bug about it. Looks like useful progress is happening there. [18:43] ogra_, regarding the image list: it's not *my* list (if anyone's it's skaet's), and it has mx5 images for Server starting today and for Xubuntu Desktop starting on Tuesday, so not everything is supposed to wait until 0801 [18:45] * micahg notices a mention of xubuntu ARM images... [18:46] micahg, Yeah. When 0705 passed with no images in site, I bumped the date to 0719, because I figured two weeks was a nice round number, and someone else had set server/mx5 to 0715 [18:47] From my memory of our last conversation about it, you didn't really care about the specific date, as long as there was something to test sufficiently before alpha-3 that you had a chance to fix obvious problems. [18:48] persia: sounds good, now I just have to take care of my other stuff so I can actually play with this image :) [18:49] sgnb, Apologies: I am having a bit of trouble following the discussion in bug #810402 : Does the 4.5 -> 4.6 change mean we need *another* ocaml transition for ABI shift? Is there something else happening? [18:49] Launchpad bug 810402 in ocaml "all native ocaml programs segfault on armel" [High,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/810402 [18:50] note that there was an ocaml rebuild upload today [18:50] which apparently ftbfs on all arches (i havent looked at the logs) [18:51] Yeah, doko uploaded ocaml to build with a different GCC. [18:51] It didn't work. [18:52] * persia grumbles at the institutionalilsation of *yet another* resolution: "qHD", with a vertical component less than 600 pixels (and also less than the 576 pixels we chased last time someone had this sort of brilliant idea) [18:53] well, but you should at least get back horizontally what you lose vertically :) [18:53] But the discussion in 810402 seems to be missing some bits, or at least it doesn't make sense to me as a conversation. [18:53] why else would they add a q in front :P [18:53] 'q' is for "Quarter". [18:53] must be something special :) [18:54] lol [18:54] 19020x1080, except only 1/4 of it, so 540 vertical. [18:54] so not for quality ? [18:54] 960 horizontal is fine. [18:54] sure [18:54] 960x540? better than iPhone4 resolution! :) [18:54] well, thats close to PAL [18:56] Still means that we either have to squash software or declare the resolution unsupported as a primary display [18:58] i would go for the latter [18:59] how many devices that fit a formfactor we target are there ? [18:59] (with such resolution) [19:03] janimo: I know where to find you when I do have porting questions, thanks :) [19:03] micahg, ok ;) [19:04] * janimo crosses fingers it is not chromium :) [19:05] ogra_, An increasing number, since the resolution has a special name, and glass is available, rather than being considered weird. === apachelogger_ is now known as apachelogger [19:38] I'm trying to run pts/java-scimark2 and all the tests fail, exit non-zero, so it's not working for sure. Should I try the same tests with JemVM? (if that's correct?) [19:39] mahmoh: It would be interesting to look at the failure log to see why it fails. I have openjdk-jre-headless running jenkins slave on panda. [19:40] oh, and a crash in netboot too: http://paste.ubuntu.com/644324/ ( cmagina ) [19:41] GrueMaster: good point, let me try that [19:49] GrueMaster: it wasn't installed correctly b/c unzip wasn't installed! Is that a package bug I would guess? [19:50] dependency issue. Should have resolved on it's own, but phoronix-test-suite relies on aptitude to install (which isn't part of the standard image). [19:51] it's not? It's installed on my image (netboot w/ basic server), unzip was not [19:51] I have seen a lot of dependency issues with phoronix. [19:52] My netboot install with basic server & openssh-server didn't have aptitude. Not sure what else was missing. Had to install build-essential for the io tests as well. [19:53] Possibly due to the debootstrap issues. [19:53] GrueMaster: hm, build-essential was installed for me by pts, aptitude's on there, wonder why our installs are different, itneresting [19:53] interesting [19:54] I installed fresh Tuesday, right in the middle of the bootstrap issues. [19:55] ok, I'm installing now on another board so I'll check [19:55] actually, the install crashed (noted above) [19:55] bbib === MrCurious_ is now known as MrCurious [20:02] and if anyone is nice enough to take a look at this and tell me why it's failing I'd appreciate it: http://paste.ubuntu.com/644336/ [20:07] mahmoh: Install libaio-dev [20:13] GrueMaster: awesome, thx [20:14] oh, it's installed already [20:34] Hy. I did this : http://seabright.co.nz/2011/03/29/building-the-ubuntu-pandaboard-kernel/ but it didn't seem to do anything. Where should the uImage be? [20:35] arch/arm/boot [20:38] it only compilse some object files but makes no linking... is this right? [20:41] It might be I'm getting just to sleepy. I'll continue tomorrow. [20:41] no that's not right [20:41] thsi page assumes you've got an arm crosscompiler [20:42] I was doing it on arm not on crosscompiler [20:43] Okey... thanks. [20:43] ok so you don't have CROSS_COMPILE= line ? [20:44] in makefile? [20:44] ... [20:44] in the page you gave, it says to do export CROSS_COMPILE=blabla [20:44] no [20:44] i didn't need to.. [20:45] i didn't crosscompile. [20:45]