Prev: Blancpain Villeret Mens Watch 4082-3642-55B
Next: firefox: execute javascript url in scope of current page
From: J G Miller on 1 May 2010 11:08
On Sat, 01 May 2010 16:45:26 +0200, Philipp Kraus wrote:

> I don't know why the configure process went wrong. Normally I understand
> the errors, but at the glibc I'm a little bit overwhelmed

Perhaps having a read of these two items may assist you in successfully
compiling glibc

<http://www.linuxquestions.ORG/questions/linux-from-scratch-13/chapter-5-glibc-configure-as-and-ld-too-old-774543/>

and also consider the use of the -march parameter

<http://forums.gentoo.ORG/viewtopic-t-821370-postdays-0-postorder-asc-start-0.html>
From: Philipp Kraus on 2 May 2010 06:31
On 2010-05-01 17:08:00 +0200, J G Miller <miller(a)yoyo.ORG> said:

> On Sat, 01 May 2010 16:45:26 +0200, Philipp Kraus wrote:
>
>> I don't know why the configure process went wrong. Normally I understand
>> the errors, but at the glibc I'm a little bit overwhelmed
>
> Perhaps having a read of these two items may assist you in successfully
> compiling glibc
>
> <http://www.linuxquestions.ORG/questions/linux-from-scratch-13/chapter-5-glibc-configure-as-and-ld-too-old-774543/>

and
>
> also consider the use of the -march parameter
>
> <http://forums.gentoo.ORG/viewtopic-t-821370-postdays-0-postorder-asc-start-0.html>

I
>
had read both articles and before I had read them I set up my path env to:
/opt/binutils-2.19.1/bin/:/opt/binutils-2.19.1/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/bin/:/usr/local/sbin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/bin:/sbin:/bin:/opt/bin:/usr/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/gcc-bin/4.4.3

If

I run ld --version it shows the correct 2.19.1 version, but the glibc
configure script use the 2.20

checking whether
/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/4.4.3/../../../../x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/bin/as
is GNU as... yes
checking whether
/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/4.4.3/../../../../x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ld
is GNU ld... yes
checking for
/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/4.4.3/../../../../x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/bin/as...
/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/4.4.3/../../../../x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/bin/as
checking

version of
/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/4.4.3/../../../../x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/bin/as...
2.20.1.20100303, bad
checking for
/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/4.4.3/../../../../x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ld...
/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/4.4.3/../../../../x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ld
checking

version of
/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/4.4.3/../../../../x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ld...
2.20.1.20100303, bad

It seems that the configure script take the path information out of the
gcc configuration

Thank

Phil

From: J G Miller on 2 May 2010 11:11
On Sunday, May 2nd, 2010 at 12:31:22h +0200, Philipp Kraus wrote:

> It seems that the configure script take the path information out of the
> gcc configuration

Yes the configure script will use the paths in the configure script
configuration to guess as to where the utilities are located or run
the <package-name>-config script from the development files bundle
for that software to determine where the necessary files are located.

So it appears that you have installed the newer versions of binutils
in a non-standard location and that the configure is not seeing those
locations as would be expected.

Instead of putting the newer versions in /opt/<something> can you
not install them under /usr/local?

And does using the -march option help in getting around the problem of
as and ld being reported as being too old?
From: Philipp Kraus on 2 May 2010 11:23
On 2010-05-02 17:11:30 +0200, J G Miller <miller(a)yoyo.ORG> said:

> Instead of putting the newer versions in /opt/<something> can you
> not install them under /usr/local?

I have two solution: Downgrade and override my working binutils
under /usr or use the binutils in the non-default location.
I don't downgrade my binutils because I think my running glibc will be
take some error.

> And does using the -march option help in getting around the problem of
> as and ld being reported as being too old?

No, I exportet the C and CXX flags from my /etc/make.conf and the configure
creates the same errors

Ohhh I found a solution:
The configure script accepts the flag --with-binutils=<Path> but I have set
the always to /opt/<mybinutil>/ (I found this in a lot of tutorials), but
the path must be set ti /opt/<mybinutil>/bin and now configure runs
without errors and make is compiling the glibc at the moment

Thanks

Phil

From: J G Miller on 2 May 2010 12:21
On Sun, 02 May 2010 17:23:53 +0200, Philipp Kraus wrote:

> The configure script accepts the flag --with-binutils=<Path> but I have
> set the always to /opt/<mybinutil>/

Yes, the lesson to be learnt is that if you have necessary files
in a non standard place, check all of the configure script flags to
see if one can be used to specify the location.

> and now configure runs without errors and make is compiling
> the glibc at the moment

That is good news.

Maybe you would like to explain why you need this newer version
of glibc when it has successfully compiled and installed?
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3
Prev: Blancpain Villeret Mens Watch 4082-3642-55B
Next: firefox: execute javascript url in scope of current page