OpenWrt Forum Archive

Topic: problem building

The content of this topic has been archived on 19 Apr 2018. There are no obvious gaps in this topic, but there may still be some posts missing at the end.

Hi,

Got the following error with Kamikaze/r6183

The error:
make[5]: Entering directory `/home/ubuntu/trunk/build_mipsel/iptables-1.3.5'
Rules.make:29: target `extensions/libipt_DELUDE.d' given more than once in the same rule.
Rules.make:33: target `extensions/libipt_DELUDE.so' given more than once in the same rule.
Something wrong... deleting dependencies.
Something wrong... deleting dependencies.

The lines from Rules.make:

$(SHARED_LIBS:%.so=%.d): %.d: %.c
        @-$(CC) -M -MG $(CFLAGS) $< | \
            sed -e 's@^.*\.o:@$*.d $*_sh.o:@' > $@

$(SHARED_LIBS): %.so : %_sh.o
        $(LD) -shared $(EXT_LDFLAGS) -o $@ $<

---

Anybody has some tips? Is there a "stable" build I should download?
I have a wrt54gl rev. 1.1 without modifications

/Peter

Hi,

I just read the following "[6182] broke iptables)"
Now if that is the case: How do I check out revision 6181?

Thanks
Peter

sommer_rock wrote:

Now if that is the case: How do I check out revision 6181?

Easy: 'svn co -r 6181 ; svn co -r 6181 '

You also like to delete the latest toolchain patch (trunk/toolchain/uClibc/patches/160-move_stack_end.patch). Gives a lot of problems for me. Ticket #1242

EDIT: All packages building fine with r6181 for x86-2.6 target.

(Last edited by forum2006 on 23 Jan 2007, 11:15)

Thanks,

I read that I have to make sym links to packages in the the seperate package directory when needed. Is there any link how much I can include for a wrt54gl v1.1 without "filling it up" and do I need any of the packages for just making a first test?

forum2006 wrote:

EDIT: All packages building fine with r6181 for x86-2.6 target.

As far as could read I need a 2.4 kernel for broadcom because 2.6 support is buggy with the non binary driver?

/Peter

I you like wireless on the Broadcom target select brcm-2.4.

(Last edited by forum2006 on 23 Jan 2007, 12:44)

The discussion might have continued from here.