[U-Boot-Users] Error on installing ELDK 2.1

Hi,all,
Some errors came up when I installed ELDK 2.1 on my REDHAT 7.3 HOST PC as follows.
[root@sgj opt]# mount /mnt/cdrom/ [root@sgj opt]# /mnt/cdrom/install -d /opt/eldk/ ppc_8xx
Do you really want to install into /opt/eldk directory[y/n]?: y
Creating directories error: unrecognized db option: "db3" ignored. Done Installing cross RPMs
error: unrecognized db option: "db3" ignored. error: unrecognized db option: "db3" ignored. error: cannot open Name index using db1 - Invalid argument (22) error: unrecognized db option: "db3" ignored. Preparing... error: unrecognized db option: "db3" ignored. error: cannot open Basenames index using db1 - Invalid argument (22) ########################################### [100%] package rpm-4.0.3-1.03b_2 is for a different architecture
I downloaded ELDK 2.1 and burned a CD. BTW, I had installed MVL PRO3.0 on my host.Should I removed it for installing ELDK 2.1?
Thanks in advance!
Sam
_________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? 完全免费的雅虎电邮,马上注册获赠额外60兆网络存储空间 http://cn.rd.yahoo.com/mail_cn/tag/?http://cn.mail.yahoo.com

In message 20040226043513.14271.qmail@web15201.mail.bjs.yahoo.com you wrote:
Some errors came up when I installed ELDK 2.1 on my REDHAT 7.3 HOST PC as follows.
See http://www.denx.de/twiki/bin/view/DULG/ELDKInstallationAborts
I downloaded ELDK 2.1 and burned a CD.
Alternatively, you gould use ELDK 3.0; see ftp://ftp.leo.org/pub/eldk/3.0/ppc-linux-x86/distribution/
BTW, I had installed MVL PRO3.0 on my host.Should I removed it for installing ELDK 2.1?
There is no reason to do that.
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk

Dear Mr. Wolfgang,
You wrote:
Some errors came up when I installed ELDK 2.1 on my REDHAT 7.3 HOST PC as follows.
See http://www.denx.de/twiki/bin/view/DULG/ELDKInstallationAborts
Thanks for your hints.I neglected the FAQ.Sorry!
Best regards,
Sam
_________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? 完全免费的雅虎电邮,马上注册获赠额外60兆网络存储空间 http://cn.rd.yahoo.com/mail_cn/tag/?http://cn.mail.yahoo.com

Evening (o;
Users of SMSC91C111 chips...
What is the performance of the driver inside u-boot?
Get around up to 2 secs delay to "ping alive" and downloading a 2.5MByte binary with tftp takes up to 7 secs.
At least downliading works without errors on BF533 (o;
rick

What is the performance of the driver inside u-boot?
Get around up to 2 secs delay to "ping alive" and
Yes, the SMSC91C111 has an very long auto-negotation cycle...
downloading a 2.5MByte binary with tftp takes up to 7 secs.
Wow, about 3 MBit -- that's good for the Chip. The SMSC91C111 self isn't fast enough. It has an non performant chip design (there are only 2x2KByte for FIFO). My latest tests with an PXA255 a/o NIOS + SMSC91C111 @ 32 bit bus results the same...
Best Regards, Stephan Linz

What is the performance of the driver inside u-boot?
Get around up to 2 secs delay to "ping alive" and
Yes, the SMSC91C111 has an very long auto-negotation cycle...
downloading a 2.5MByte binary with tftp takes up to 7 secs.
Wow, about 3 MBit -- that's good for the Chip. The SMSC91C111 self
isn't
fast enough. It has an non performant chip design (there are only 2x2KByte for FIFO). My latest tests with an PXA255 a/o NIOS + SMSC91C111 @ 32
bit
bus results the same...
Seems also tftp download is corrupting some packets...at least uclinux for BF533 always ends in panic...but not with same image loaded through VisualDSP...
Maybe should test first with loads (o;
rick
participants (4)
-
Richard Klingler
-
Sam Song
-
Stephan Linz
-
Wolfgang Denk