Hello Martin, On Fri, 15 Jan 2016 15:30:47 -0800, Martin Michlmayr <t...@cyrius.com> wrote: > * Albert ARIBAUD <albert.u.b...@aribaud.net> [2016-01-15 22:52]: > > > Would you be so kind and test > > > https://d-i.debian.org/daily-images/armel/daily/kirkwood/u-boot/openrd-client/ > > > > > > This is 2016.01 (no rc) > > > > It is the same as the one I tested first and which failed. I had > > extracted it from > > http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/pool/main/u/u-boot/u-boot_2016.01+dfsg1-1_armel.deb > > Yes, they are the same. The d-i build process simply extracts the > u-boot binary from the .deb, so it's easier for people to download. > > I'm surprised it fails to boot. Is 2016.01 from upstream working for > you?
I tested on the one hand the binary u-boot.kwb from d-i, and on the other hand the binary built from the mainline U-Boot repo, tag v2016-01, built with the toolchain fetched by U-Boot's buildman for arm, which identifies itself as 'gcc version 4.9.0 (GCC)', using binutils 2.24. The binary u-boot.kwb consistently fails to boot beyond the few lines I gave. The buildman-built kwb runs consistently. > You can find the build log here, btw: > https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=u-boot&arch=armel&ver=2016.01%2Bdfsg1-1&stamp=1452650663 Thanks. I see the build was done by newer gcc (5.3.1) and binutils (2.25.90). I will set up a local buildd so that I can reproduce this( and future builds an analyze them as needed). Amicalement, -- Albert.
