Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2006 10:27:32 +0100 (CET) From: Harti Brandt <hartmut.brandt@dlr.de> To: =?iso-8859-1?q?Dag-Erling_Sm=F8rgrav?= <des@des.no> Cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org, stable@FreeBSD.org, sparc64@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: [releng_6 tinderbox] failure on sparc64/sparc64 Message-ID: <20060203102603.C59587@beagle.kn.op.dlr.de> In-Reply-To: <86irrwre3y.fsf@xps.des.no> References: <20060201165326.6E44E7302F@freebsd-current.sentex.ca> <20060201180223.O52964@beagle.kn.op.dlr.de> <43E0F41C.5020907@samsco.org> <86fyn242w0.fsf@xps.des.no> <20060203090804.Q59587@beagle.kn.op.dlr.de> <86irrwre3y.fsf@xps.des.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 3 Feb 2006, Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav wrote: DS>Harti Brandt <hartmut.brandt@dlr.de> writes: DS>> The interesting point is: why does it build on my real sparc (2-UII CPUs, DS>> 512MByte memory), but not on the tinderbox. Is there something about the DS>> crosscompiler that is different? DS> DS>Different CFLAGS perhaps? I have everything out-of-the-box - no special CFLAGS. harti
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060203102603.C59587>