On Fri, 24 May 1996 02:38:45 +0200 (MET DST) 
 e.p.boven@student.utwente.nl (Paul Boven) wrote:

 > I finally built my first kernel today. Supped ksrc-common and -sparc, 
 > and configed my own "BLURB". It's sitting in my root-directory now,
 > waiting till I dare try it, but I thought it better to send this mail
 > beforehand...

heh ... "mine seems to work"  :-)

 > Question: Why is there so much clearly pc-specific stuff in the sup
 > for ksrc-common? About ISA, and PCI etc... couldn't that be moved to
 > their own ksrc? How much of it can I delete?

Not all of that is PC-specific.  The Alpha uses the ISA, PCI, and EISA 
code, too.  If you're compiling just for the sparc, you can safely nuke 
isa, pci, and eisa ... but keep dev/ic, because it contains files that 
the sparc uses.

 > The current SUP does not compile out of the box, because make sets
 > -Werror for gcc, and there are three types of error in the files:
 > places the code shouldn't reach (/* NOT REACHED */) and where a 
 > return() is missing for a non-void function. There are also warnings 
 > about variables not being initialized, though the switch-statements
 > they are in will always assign a value to them. These errors are 
 > more compiler-oversights perhaps than real bugs, and I wonder whether
 > they ought to be fixed, so the kernel will compile with -Werror.

?  Interesting ... I haven't tried compiling "todays" sources on my sparc 
yet ... I'll see if I have the same problems.

 > Then there is a last group of warnings, that are in printf-statements
 > associated with panic-calls. What happens, is that formatting strings
 > like %b (bitfield?) and %: are used, that the compiler doesn't know
 > about. Which then causes it to warn about too many arguments to the
 > printf, wich might be a problem indeed...

Sounds like your compiler is out of date ... you might consider 
installing PK's latest snapshot (on ftp.netbsd.org) to bring your system 
up to speed.

 > So what I'd like to know, what's the proper way to get these things
 > cleared? Does one submit patches? (Not that I'm about to, I just
 > kludged around with bogus retrun();'s in the NOT REACHED parts
 > and then later just removed the -Werror after kludging up the
 > the printfs). Or does one report the bugs somewhere? I refrained
 > from mentioning all those I encountered because I don't know if this
 > is the right place to turn them in, and becuase I have this nagging
 > feeling I'm probably doing something wrong myself :)

Just need to get all of your system components up to date, really.

 > Anyway, time to try my kernel, boot netbsd.diy -s, whish me luck...

Good luck!

----save the ancient forests - http://www.bayarea.net/~thorpej/forest/----
Jason R. Thorpe                                       thorpej@nas.nasa.gov
NASA Ames Research Center                               Home: 408.866.1912
NAS: M/S 258-6                                          Work: 415.604.0935
Moffett Field, CA 94035                                Pager: 415.428.6939