On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 01:28:34 +0200, Richard Zidlicky wrote:
>
> On Thu, Aug 19, 2004 at 12:16:04AM +0200, Thierry Godefroy wrote:
> >
> > Hello...
> >
> > I tried to compile the v2.4.27 kernel for the Q60 today, but I came
> > across a strange assembler error.
> >
> > I get:
> >
> > gcc -D__
Thierry Godefroy wrote:
> If the shebang compiles properly, new pre-compiled Q60-Linux kernels should
> be available "soon" (the poor 68060/66MHz is so slow when compared to a
> 2GHz Athlon XP...) from my website.
If you're interested in faster 68k machines with Linux, you might consider
to
On Thu, Aug 19, 2004 at 12:46:48PM +0200, Thierry Godefroy wrote:
>
> On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 01:28:34 +0200, Richard Zidlicky wrote:
>
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 19, 2004 at 12:16:04AM +0200, Thierry Godefroy wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello...
> > >
> > > I tried to compile the v2.4.27 kernel for the Q60 toda
On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 16:33:13 +0200, Richard Zidlicky wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 19, 2004 at 12:46:48PM +0200, Thierry Godefroy wrote:
>
> .../...
>
> > I changed it for:
> > asm __volatile__ (".chip 68060; frestore %0" : : "m" (zero));
> >
> > and everything seems to compile fine (resulting kernel sti
On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 14:27:07 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Thierry Godefroy wrote:
>
> > If the shebang compiles properly, new pre-compiled Q60-Linux kernels should
> > be available "soon" (the poor 68060/66MHz is so slow when compared to a
> > 2GHz Athlon XP...) from my website.
>
> If
On Fri, Aug 20, 2004 at 01:23:55AM +0200, Thierry Godefroy wrote:
> Even weirder: by checking with ps the parameters passed by gcc to "as", I can
> see that -m68040 of passed instead of -m68060, while gcc does receive the
> -m68060 option !
historical baggage, 68060 support was added to gcc befo
