Chris Mayes ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Ouch. Really? I'd just finished compiling a kernel package (2.2.13) with no
> apparent errors when I saw this message.
I've got a 2.2.12 kernel built with gcc 2.95.x at home, and a 2.2.13
kernel built with gcc 2.95.x at work. I haven't seen any weird pro
(But I don't know how to conveniently get this version of gcc under
Debian. I believe Alan Cox specifically disrecommended gcc 2.95 for
kernel 2.2.13.)
Ouch. Really? I'd just finished compiling a kernel package (2.2.13) with no
apparent errors when I saw this message. Were these probl
On Fri, Oct 29, 1999 at 12:20:26 -0700, Dylan Thurston wrote:
> It looks like a problem with the compiler.
Possible, but unlikely. Signal 11 errors are typically a sign of bad or
badly configured hardware (see www.bitwizard.nl/sig11). It could be a
compiler error if it is repeatable at the exact
On Fri, Oct 29, 1999 at 01:53:12PM -0500, Charles Lewis wrote:
> Hrm...used make-dpkg for the first time and near the end(?) it crashed. Is
> anyone able to decipher these error messages?
It looks like a problem with the compiler. Which compiler are
you using? Which version of the kernel was it?
On Fri, Oct 29, 1999 at 13:53:12 -0500, Charles Lewis wrote:
> gcc: Internal compiler error: program cc1 got fatal signal 11
http://www.bitwizard.nl/sig11/
HTH,
Ray
--
PATRIOTISM A great British writer once said that if he had to choose
between betraying his country and betraying a friend he h
Hrm...used make-dpkg for the first time and near the end(?) it crashed. Is
anyone able to decipher these error messages?
#make menuconfig
#make-kpkg clean
#make-kpkg --revision custom.1.0 kernel_image
gcc: Internal compiler error: program cc1 got fatal signal 11
make[3]: *** [locks.o] Error 1
m
6 matches
Mail list logo
