[Barrelfish-users] Building newest BF

Fri Jun 29 16:52:20 CEST 2012

We only release code after all our test-cases pass. Unfortunately, we 
cannot test for every possible problem. Many bugs are due to build 
dependencies, which only occur sometimes, for example depending on the 
level of parallelism you use to compile the code. I don't know about 
this one, though.

On 06/29/2012 04:49 PM, Patrik Eklöf wrote:
> Yeah, already fixed that. Thanks.
> Still, considering rev 923 is the one for the latest stable release, I 
> am wondering why there are so many problems with it.
> I mean, it should compile without problems, just as with the last 
> release, shouldn't it? Unless there is some page about various 
> problems I am missing.
> Is there going to be any more problems compiling this rev?
>
> Regards,
> Patrik Eklöf
> Student at ICT, Master of Science in Engineering Education, IT 
> Programme, KTH, Kista
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* Stefan Kästle [stefan.kaestle at inf.ethz.ch]
> *Sent:* Friday, June 29, 2012 16:46
> *To:* barrelfish-users at lists.inf.ethz.ch
> *Subject:* Re: [Barrelfish-users] Building newest BF
>
> This is the patch:
>
> changeset:   929:0030cd9fb3e6
> user:        Kornilios Kourtis <kkourt at inf.ethz.ch>
> date:        Tue Jun 12 17:40:30 2012 +0200
> summary:     hake/Config.hs.template: switch optimization level back 
> to -O2
>
> diff -r 689e89ab292c -r 0030cd9fb3e6 hake/Config.hs.template
> --- a/hake/Config.hs.template   Mon Jun 11 09:46:36 2012 +0200
> +++ b/hake/Config.hs.template   Tue Jun 12 17:40:30 2012 +0200
> @@ -29,7 +29,7 @@
>
>  -- Optimisation flags (-Ox -g etc.) passed to compiler
>  cOptFlags :: String
> -cOptFlags = "-g -O3"
> +cOptFlags = "-g -O2"
>
>  -- Selects which libc to compile with, "oldc" or "newlib"
>  libc :: String
>
> Don't forget to either create a new build directory or remove 
> Config.hs from your current build directory as updating it in the 
> source directory will not overwrite the version in your build directory.
>
>
> On 06/29/2012 04:40 PM, Patrik Eklöf wrote:
>> Thanks.
>> That removed one error, but as soon as that finished, another popped up:
>>
>> [root at localhost build]# make
>> gcc -std=c99 -U__STRICT_ANSI__ -Wstrict-prototypes 
>> -Wold-style-definition -Wmissing-prototypes -fno-omit-frame-pointer 
>> -fno-builtin -nostdinc -U__linux__ -Ulinux -Wall -Wshadow 
>> -Wmissing-declarations -Wmissing-field-initializers -Wredundant-decls 
>> -Werror -imacros ../source/include/deputy/nodeputy.h -m64 
>> -mno-red-zone -fPIE -fno-stack-protector -Wno-unused-but-set-variable 
>> -Wno-packed-bitfield-compat -DBARRELFISH -DCONFIG_LAZY_THC 
>> -DCONFIG_NEWLIB -DUSE_KALUGA_DVM -DCONFIG_INTERCONNECT_DRIVER_LMP 
>> -DCONFIG_INTERCONNECT_DRIVER_UMP 
>> -DCONFIG_INTERCONNECT_DRIVER_MULTIHOP -DCONFIG_FLOUNDER_BACKEND_LMP 
>> -DCONFIG_FLOUNDER_BACKEND_UMP -DCONFIG_FLOUNDER_BACKEND_MULTIHOP -g 
>> -O3 -I../source/include -I../source/include/arch/x86_64 
>> -I../source/lib/newlib/newlib/libc/include -I../source/include/c 
>> -I../source/include/target/x86_64 -I../source/include/ipv4 
>> -I../source/include/posixcompat -I./x86_64/include 
>> -I./x86_64/include/dev -I../source/usr/tests/thctest 
>> -I./x86_64/usr/tests/thctest -o 
>> ./x86_64/usr/tests/thctest/_for_app_thctest/thctest.o -c 
>> ../source/usr/tests/thctest/thctest.c
>> ../source/usr/tests/thctest/thctest.c: Assembler messages:
>> ../source/usr/tests/thctest/thctest.c:53: Error: symbol 
>> `_thc_cont_return_5' is already defined
>> ../source/usr/tests/thctest/thctest.c:69: Error: symbol 
>> `_thc_cont_return_6' is already defined
>> ../source/usr/tests/thctest/thctest.c:91: Error: symbol 
>> `_thc_cont_return_7' is already defined
>> ../source/usr/tests/thctest/thctest.c:111: Error: symbol 
>> `_thc_cont_return_8' is already defined
>> make: *** [x86_64/usr/tests/thctest/_for_app_thctest/thctest.o] Error 1
>>
>> Also, I did test this on a fresh clone of the repo (using rev 923).
>> Multiple definition errors... but where do they come from?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Patrik Eklöf
>> Student at ICT, Master of Science in Engineering Education, IT 
>> Programme, KTH, Kista
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> *From:* Raphael Fuchs [raphaelfuchs at student.ethz.ch]
>> *Sent:* Friday, June 29, 2012 13:30
>> *To:* barrelfish-users at lists.inf.ethz.ch
>> *Subject:* Re: [Barrelfish-users] Building newest BF
>>
>> Hi Patrik
>>
>> We already fixed this bug in our development tree, the fix will be 
>> included in our next release. Meanwhile, you can apply the attached 
>> patch yourself, it should solve your problem.
>>
>> Regards
>> Raphael
>>
>> On 29.06.2012 12:42, Patrik Eklöf wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I'm having trouble building the newest rev of BF.
>>> I've tried the newest as well as the stable 922 rev, but both give 
>>> the same error.
>>>
>>> The complete error is:
>>> ../source/include/acpi_client/acpi_client.h:19:36: fatal error: 
>>> if/acpi_rpcclient_defs.h: No such file or directory
>>>
>>> I've tried downloading the source from scratch, then applying the 
>>> patch at http://wiki.barrelfish.org/Getting_Started 
>>> <http://wiki.barrelfish.org/Getting_Started> (because otherwise I 
>>> get the dreaded Hake error), then running the hake script and 
>>> finally make.
>>>
>>> I've updated all packages to latest, but still running on the 3.1 
>>> kernel to see if it would help the issue, but it did not.
>>> Any idea what's wrong?
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Patrik Eklöf
>>> Student at ICT, Master of Science in Engineering Education, IT 
>>> Programme, KTH, Kista
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Barrelfish-users mailing list
>>> Barrelfish-users at lists.inf.ethz.ch
>>> https://lists.inf.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/barrelfish-users
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Barrelfish-users mailing list
>> Barrelfish-users at lists.inf.ethz.ch
>> https://lists.inf.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/barrelfish-users
>
> -- 
> Stefan
>
>

-- 
Stefan

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.inf.ethz.ch/pipermail/barrelfish-users/attachments/20120629/66c824ac/attachment.html 