[pups] 2BSD build problem - unix.o not too big

[pups] 2BSD build problem - unix.o not too big

[Steven M. Schultz]

> From: "Ian King" <iking at killthewabbit.org>
> I'm building a 2.11BSD kernel on my 11/73 (so I can include the networking
> code and put my machine on the LAN!), and I'm seeing the error "too big for
> type 431".  Through the wonders of Google, I saw your discussion of this
> error and followed your advice (from 1996!).  However, when I ask 'size

	I'd have, up to now, sworn that the overlay setup was in the 
	documentation (one of the appendices) but it could well be that it's
	still off in a file somewhere in the mess I call my filesystem ;)

> unix.o', I get a size comfortably within the limits for base - 50112, well
> below the 57344 you cite.  None of the overlays exceeds 8192, and the 'total
> text' figure is well below your example, too.  FWIW, I did a 'naive build'

	Do you have any 0 length overlays?   There can't be any gaps in the
	overlay structure.

	For example, this is legal:

		overlays: 8128,7552,8000,7296,8192,7424,5824,6784,3520

	but this is not:
		
		overlays: 8128,7552,8000,7296,8192,0,5824,6784,3520

> first, copying GENERIC and changing a few parameters; after seeing the error
> 'text segment too big' I went through the config file with a little more
> thought and eliminated drivers I clearly didn't need (I don't have RL01/02s,

	You might need to go thru the Makefile too.  Good idea to eliminate
	drivers you don't have (save their D-space requirements) but that
	can create empty overlays and that does not work.

> for instance).  Then I started getting this error.  I did a 'make clean'
> just to be sure, but still make gives me the 'too big for type 431' error.
> (Yes, I RTFM on ld.)

	Hmmm, patch level 431 is recent enough I'd have thought to avoid
	a 'ld' problem (current is 444 but nothing recently has touched
	ld).

	What is the output from 'size unix.o'?

	Cheers,
	Steven Schultz

[pups] 2BSD build problem - unix.o not too big

[David Evans]

On Sun, Mar 16, 2003 at 11:36:02PM -0800, Steven M. Schultz wrote:
> 	I'd have, up to now, sworn that the overlay setup was in the 
> 	documentation (one of the appendices) but it could well be that it's
> 	still off in a file somewhere in the mess I call my filesystem ;)
> 

  I don't recall seeing any overlay info when I set up my 11/73 back in
January.  I even asked the dreaded overlay FAQ here!  :)  I was also at
431.

-- 
David Evans          (NeXTMail/MIME OK)             dfevans at bbcr.uwaterloo.ca
Ph.D. Candidate, Computer/Synth Junkie     http://bbcr.uwaterloo.ca/~dfevans/
University of Waterloo         "Default is the value selected by the composer
Ontario, Canada           overridden by your command." - Roland TR-707 Manual

[pups] 2BSD build problem - unix.o not too big

[Steven M. Schultz]

Hi -

> From: David Evans <dfevans at bbcr.uwaterloo.ca>
> 
>   I don't recall seeing any overlay info when I set up my 11/73 back in
> January.  I even asked the dreaded overlay FAQ here!  :)  I was also at 431.

	Ok, I probably only thought about including the writeup in the
	documentation.   I know I did write up a moderately lengthy 
	article about dealing with the overlay setup in response to a
	problem someone was having.  I just never went and incorporated it 
	into the setup/installatino documentation ;(

	One thing, obvious now that I think of it, I forgot to mention last
	night is that "too big for type 431" can also happen if the D space
	total is too large.   If 'MAXUSERS' is set too high for example
	then more than 48KB of D space will be needed and the linker will
	complain.    Look at the sum of the DATA and BSS segments (it might
	be necessary to sum up the .o files individually) - if it's pushing
	48KB then that's the problem.

	Cheers,
	Steven Schultz

[pups] 2BSD build problem - unix.o not too big

[Ian King]

Steven,

I'm building a 2.11BSD kernel on my 11/73 (so I can include the networking
code and put my machine on the LAN!), and I'm seeing the error "too big for
type 431".  Through the wonders of Google, I saw your discussion of this
error and followed your advice (from 1996!).  However, when I ask 'size
unix.o', I get a size comfortably within the limits for base - 50112, well
below the 57344 you cite.  None of the overlays exceeds 8192, and the 'total
text' figure is well below your example, too.  FWIW, I did a 'naive build'
first, copying GENERIC and changing a few parameters; after seeing the error
'text segment too big' I went through the config file with a little more
thought and eliminated drivers I clearly didn't need (I don't have RL01/02s,
for instance).  Then I started getting this error.  I did a 'make clean'
just to be sure, but still make gives me the 'too big for type 431' error.
(Yes, I RTFM on ld.)

I am standing here beside myself.  :-)  And I am humbly soliciting
suggestions....  -- Ian

PS: I'm at patch level 431, per the VERSION file.