Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
Installing Gentoo - The Developers Method - Stage1 and NPTL
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 12, 13, 14 ... 23, 24, 25  Next  
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Documentation, Tips & Tricks
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
MoonWalker
Guru
Guru


Joined: 04 Jul 2002
Posts: 449

PostPosted: Wed Nov 24, 2004 12:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

did an #emerge sync and found out there was a new gcc-config-1.3.7-r1 but on installing the ebuild it spitted out this line
Code:
[color=red]*[/color] /usr/bin/gcc-config : could not locate '[color=red]*[/color]' in '/etc/env.d/gcc/'!


I wonder what '*" is and if it have any importance. the package installed but nothing changed, same behave of gcc-config and grub bombs as before.

I'm doing a
Code:
#emerge -e system && emerge -e system
now and see if it changes anything or if it even bombs. I have other things to do anyhow!
_________________
/Joakim

Living on earth is expensive, but it includes a free trip around the sun
every year.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MoonWalker
Guru
Guru


Joined: 04 Jul 2002
Posts: 449

PostPosted: Wed Nov 24, 2004 10:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have now done a
Code:
#emerge -e system && emerge -e system
and grub still bomb with
Code:
checking for C compiler default output name... configure: error: C compiler cannot create executables!
:twisted:

I don't know what it is, but "something" is wrong with 2004.3
_________________
/Joakim

Living on earth is expensive, but it includes a free trip around the sun
every year.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Deranger
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 26 Aug 2004
Posts: 1215

PostPosted: Wed Nov 24, 2004 10:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I know, I know... :(

There's something really badly b0rked...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
XyryX
n00b
n00b


Joined: 24 Nov 2004
Posts: 10

PostPosted: Wed Nov 24, 2004 10:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I finally got the thing to compile through bootstrap after doing 5 complete reinstals, and every bug fix suggested on these forums..

But..

Emerge gcc and glibc activates ntpl fine.. Bootstrap then removes it. Or emerge system removes it EVERY time.. I can reproduce this over and over and over and over..

Of course I have also had the gcc-config errors, the cannot find gcc errors, etc etc etc..

hehe.. 4 days of installing..

I have tried doing emerge gcc glibc before bootstrap and after bootstrap before emerge system.. In both cases it compiles with ntpl support.. Then in both cases its recompiled to not use it by either bootstrap.sh or emerge system..

How can I stop it recompiling gcc and glibc and anything else I know is working fine when I execute bootstrap or emerge system ???

For interests sake.. I am trying to make a athlon 1200+ into a server box. No graphics needed as it has no monitor/keyboard etc.. I want everything to be remote through another PC I am also setting up Pent4 1.5.. The pent4 1.5 will of course be running a grphical interface..

Btw.. I have only been using USE="ntpl ntplonly"

Is there anything else I really need for either box ???

Btw.. was really looking forward to doing this with gentoo.. hehe.. But really need it finished by saturday or back to fedora I go :-(
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
slycordinator
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 31 Jan 2004
Posts: 3060
Location: Korea

PostPosted: Thu Nov 25, 2004 2:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

MoonWalker wrote:
I have now done a
Code:
#emerge -e system && emerge -e system
and grub still bomb with
Code:
checking for C compiler default output name... configure: error: C compiler cannot create executables!
:twisted:

I don't know what it is, but "something" is wrong with 2004.3


Something's wrong with your C compiler. Perhaps you have a typo in your CFLAGS. Or perhaps you didn't emerge gcc or glibc.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
danbond_98
n00b
n00b


Joined: 23 Aug 2003
Posts: 8
Location: Exeter, UK

PostPosted: Thu Nov 25, 2004 2:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

getting same problem, tried a couple of goes at bootstrap but no luck. will be looking forwards to when it all gets sorted so can get gentoo onto my laptop at last!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
geekporn
n00b
n00b


Joined: 17 Jan 2004
Posts: 17

PostPosted: Thu Nov 25, 2004 2:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Am I missing something? Everytime I try to run bootstrap It fails with gettext:

Code:

checking for a BSD-compatible install... /bin/install -c
checking whether build environment is sane... yes
checking for gawk... gawk
checking whether make sets $(MAKE)... yes
checking for i686-pc-linux-gnu-strip... no
checking for strip... strip
checking for i686-pc-linux-gnu-gcc... gcc
checking for C compiler default output file name... configure: error: C compiler cannot create executables
See `config.log' for more details.
configure: error: /bin/sh './configure' failed for autoconf-lib-link


I know this error has been encountered before but the "ln -s gcc-lib gcc" fix didn't work on this one.

I have tried building with the default make.conf from the tut and also with just nptl and then my own little set of USE flags. I have tried to set the compiler with gcc-config and that didn't make a difference either. I looked through all the install docs for the standard install just to see if i missed something. At least i am not the only one with issues, should have followed this on 2004.2. Anyways all I can say is thanks to everyone here for providing help and guidance.

The only thing else i can think of is to build the linux26-headers without USE="-* build bootstrap" and see if that helps, it recompiles gcc and stuff? will this get the gettext cruft from killing my install? or will this just bork the whole thing? Anyways won't hurt to try. Will post with results.

[edit]
didn't help, still fails at gettext when just emerging linux26-headers.
I am officially lost on this one
[/edit]

[edit]
I went ahead and tried to rebuild gcc, of course it didn't work. compiler unable to create exicutables.
[/edit]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sarge
n00b
n00b


Joined: 30 Aug 2004
Posts: 27

PostPosted: Thu Nov 25, 2004 9:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

slycordinator wrote:
MoonWalker wrote:
I have now done a
Code:
#emerge -e system && emerge -e system
and grub still bomb with
Code:
checking for C compiler default output name... configure: error: C compiler cannot create executables!
:twisted:

I don't know what it is, but "something" is wrong with 2004.3


Something's wrong with your C compiler. Perhaps you have a typo in your CFLAGS. Or perhaps you didn't emerge gcc or glibc.

Same errors here. Reinstalled glibc, gcc, gcc-config, linux26-headers several times vith no luck, still gettin` errors in emerge grub and gcc-config -l || (-c) || (-v).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vicaya
n00b
n00b


Joined: 26 Jun 2004
Posts: 57

PostPosted: Thu Nov 25, 2004 9:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yeah, I was using 2004.3 stage1 on a brand new $300 dell 4600 (p4 2.8GHz) with nptl, gcc 3.4.3, udev and 2.6.9-r4 kernel. It aborted in the middle of the bootstrap, after gcc 3.4.3 was emerged. I went into /etc/env.d/gcc and found the config had a few garbage chars. Fixed it to CURRENT=i686-pc-linux-gnu-3.4.3. gcc-config still complained about bad profiles. Then I looked at the gcc-config and sure enough it's checking for gcc-lib paths, so I fixed gcc symlink to gcc-lib in /usr/lib and gcc-config 2 && source /etc/profile, emerge --resume. Everything seems to be fine. It's been running kde 3.3.1 for a while now :)

I think someone b0rked portage (esp, the bootstrap.sh, as I noticed at one point it was not even executable) in the last few days as I installed pretty much the same thing (sans the desktop stuff, but with root on raid1) on a dell 400sc using 2004.3 (the same day it came out) without a hitch.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MoonWalker
Guru
Guru


Joined: 04 Jul 2002
Posts: 449

PostPosted: Thu Nov 25, 2004 10:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

XyryX wrote:
(text deleted)
I have tried doing emerge gcc glibc before bootstrap and after bootstrap before emerge system.. In both cases it compiles with ntpl support.. Then in both cases its recompiled to not use it by either bootstrap.sh or emerge system..

How can I stop it recompiling gcc and glibc and anything else I know is working fine when I execute bootstrap or emerge system ???

(text deleted)

Btw.. I have only been using USE="ntpl ntplonly"
(text deleted)

First, it's USE="nptl nptlonly" AND NOT USE="ntpl ntplonly", but it's maybe hjust a typo on your part :?:

I think this is normal behave with nptl, it compiles glibc twice, ones with nptl and once w/o (as all packages can't use it, so there need to be an alternative), unless you use USE="nptlonly"

You should NOT use both nptl AND nptlonly in your use flags, I think but I may be wrong here. But if I have got it right it works like this:
Code:
USE="nptl" 'add nptl to the normal feature set of glibc=make 2 binaries
USE="nptlonly" 'replace the normal feature set of glibc=make 1 nptl capable binary only


I'm not sure what's happen if you use both flags but possibly it confuses poertage.
_________________
/Joakim

Living on earth is expensive, but it includes a free trip around the sun
every year.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Deranger
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 26 Aug 2004
Posts: 1215

PostPosted: Thu Nov 25, 2004 10:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have been running USE="nptl nptlonly" compiled glibc since that flag came into glibc ;)

Read more from page 3 of this thread.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MoonWalker
Guru
Guru


Joined: 04 Jul 2002
Posts: 449

PostPosted: Thu Nov 25, 2004 10:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

slycordinator wrote:
MoonWalker wrote:
I have now done a
Code:
#emerge -e system && emerge -e system
and grub still bomb with
Code:
checking for C compiler default output name... configure: error: C compiler cannot create executables!
:twisted:

I don't know what it is, but "something" is wrong with 2004.3


Something's wrong with your C compiler. Perhaps you have a typo in your CFLAGS. Or perhaps you didn't emerge gcc or glibc.

Yes something's definately wrong with my C compiler, but it's not my CFLAGS. I'm not sure what it is, but gcc-conf doesn't seam to work properly, if this is something to do with the gcc-conf code or the dataset it uses, I can't tell.

But when looking at config.log of the borked grub I see
Code:
configure:2371: checking for C compiler version
configure:2374: getCC -fno-pic -nopie --version </dev/null > &5
./configure:line 2375:getCC:command not found
configure:2377:$?=127
configure:2379: getCC -fno-pic -nopie -v </dev/null > &5
./configure:line 2380:getCC:command not found
(and so on until finally)
configure:failed program was:
| /* confdefs.h.  */
|
And this bug imply getCC should really be tc-getCC and that's why grub bombs. No one seam to be inspired to touch the grub ebuild though :(
_________________
/Joakim

Living on earth is expensive, but it includes a free trip around the sun
every year.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MoonWalker
Guru
Guru


Joined: 04 Jul 2002
Posts: 449

PostPosted: Thu Nov 25, 2004 10:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oktane wrote:
I have been running USE="nptl nptlonly" compiled glibc since that flag came into glibc ;)

Read more from page 3 of this thread.
OK your right, nptlonly cannot be used on its own but have to suplement nptl. from ebuild
Code:
pkg_setup() {
        if use nptlonly && use !nptl ; then
                eerror "If you want nptlonly, add nptl to your USE too ;p"
                die "nptlonly without nptl"
        fi

        # give some sort of warning about the nptl logic changes...
        if want_nptl && use !nptlonly ; then
                ewarn "Warning! Gentoo's GLIBC with NPTL enabled now behaves like the"
                ewarn "glibc from almost every other distribution out there. This means"
                ewarn "that glibc is compiled -twice-, once with linuxthreads and once"
                ewarn "with nptl. The NPTL version is installed to lib/tls and is still"
                ewarn "used by default. If you do not need nor want the linuxthreads"
                ewarn "fallback, you can disable this behavior by adding nptlonly to"
                ewarn "USE to save yourself some compile time."
                ebeep
                epause
        fi
}
But I still think it's a good thing to have the fallback to linuxthreeds there as nptl anyway is used by default. nptlonly doesn't save you any compile time the day your server bombs because you use some package that not support nptl. You still have a "full featured" nptl system w/o nptlonly!
_________________
/Joakim

Living on earth is expensive, but it includes a free trip around the sun
every year.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MoonWalker
Guru
Guru


Joined: 04 Jul 2002
Posts: 449

PostPosted: Thu Nov 25, 2004 10:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

In an other threed, someone suggested to use grub-static instead of grub, that's the 0.93 branch, instead of the 0.95 branch. Not sure if this is a good idea and if it makes any differance. I haven't tried.

BTW, current version of grub is not developed anymore and officially named Grub legacy, while all development is directed to the new grub2 which isn't stable yet afaik and only avail by cvs.

Anyhow, I just wonder are the devs aware of the severe problems that exist with 2004.3 and is anything done about it :?:
_________________
/Joakim

Living on earth is expensive, but it includes a free trip around the sun
every year.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Deranger
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 26 Aug 2004
Posts: 1215

PostPosted: Thu Nov 25, 2004 11:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

GRUB 0.94 compiles just fine.

I agree fully, devs should really to do something with this.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MoonWalker
Guru
Guru


Joined: 04 Jul 2002
Posts: 449

PostPosted: Thu Nov 25, 2004 11:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oktane wrote:
GRUB 0.94 compiles just fine.

I agree fully, devs should really to do something with this.


huh such a chicken route... :wink: just kidding, yes that's the workaround.
Code:
#echo ">=sys-boot/grub-0.95" >> /etc/portage/package.mask
'comment:if /etc/portage/package.mask doesn't exist, first do
#touch /etc/portage/package.mask


I just wonder if they are aware of it. I would file a bug or 10, but I have a trouble with getting sshd started on the box i build and other boxes here is just windows so I can't get the error messages etc. out in a sensable way, but have to "reproduce" everything by hand typing, first on paper then into the computer.
_________________
/Joakim

Living on earth is expensive, but it includes a free trip around the sun
every year.


Last edited by MoonWalker on Thu Nov 25, 2004 2:51 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rjw8703
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 14 Aug 2004
Posts: 246
Location: Auburn, Al

PostPosted: Thu Nov 25, 2004 1:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Is your code segment correct? I get a > symbol when I hit enter
after the second line. I use ^c to get out of there. Could you explain
what is happenning? Thanks
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MoonWalker
Guru
Guru


Joined: 04 Jul 2002
Posts: 449

PostPosted: Thu Nov 25, 2004 2:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The "2nd" line is a comment and should not be typed in, thought that was clear, but have edited and made it clearer now :)

The first line "echos" >=sys-boot/grub-0.95 into /etc/portage/package.mask file where >> means it appends to the current existing file. This demands the file (and directory) exist or you have to create them.
Code:
#mkdir /etc/portage
#touch /etc/portage/package.mask
if the file doesn't exist, the last line could as well be
Code:
#echo ">=sys-boot/grub-0.95" > /etc/portage/package.mask
but that will overwrite any existing data so that's why I didn't list it before, for your own protection :wink:
_________________
/Joakim

Living on earth is expensive, but it includes a free trip around the sun
every year.


Last edited by MoonWalker on Fri Nov 26, 2004 8:05 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
hielvc
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 19 Apr 2002
Posts: 2805
Location: Oceanside, Ca

PostPosted: Thu Nov 25, 2004 5:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MoonWalker wrote
Code:

#echo ">=sys-boot/grub-0.95 > /etc/portage/package.mask


change to
Code:

#echo ">=sys-boot/grub-0.95" >> /etc/portage/package.mask


The chage is ">>" that appends to the file instead of over writing it. Also when you echo "blaa" > or >> to file, this is know as redirect, the file is created for you if it doesnt exist.
_________________
An A-Z Index of the Linux BASH command line


Last edited by hielvc on Fri Nov 26, 2004 4:36 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Deranger
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 26 Aug 2004
Posts: 1215

PostPosted: Thu Nov 25, 2004 6:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

There's still a typo. Only one " :wink:

# echo ">=sys-boot/grub-0.95" >> /etc/portage/package.mask
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
-TooL
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Posts: 75

PostPosted: Thu Nov 25, 2004 8:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

So, do we use the 2004.2 cd to boot smp?

The new 2004.3 miniman and live cd wont give the smp option.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Deranger
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 26 Aug 2004
Posts: 1215

PostPosted: Thu Nov 25, 2004 9:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

-TooL wrote:
So, do we use the 2004.2 cd to boot smp?

The new 2004.3 miniman and live cd wont give the smp option.

2004.3 uses 2.6 (SMP) kernel as a default, so you don't have to worry about it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rjw8703
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 14 Aug 2004
Posts: 246
Location: Auburn, Al

PostPosted: Thu Nov 25, 2004 11:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks. That was the trick. Iv'e been working on installing gentoo since Aug 04 and this is the furthest that I have gotten. Now on to the next step.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Imago
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 25 Nov 2004
Posts: 157
Location: Germany

PostPosted: Thu Nov 25, 2004 11:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi
i just came across the same bug MoonWalker mentioned, when doing a stage1 installation of gentoo on my notebook yesterday.
MoonWalker wrote:

...
Code:
typed extract:
>>>md5...
nptl
x86
!nptlonly
*Warning.....
* ....
>>> unpacking source
nptl
x86
* Checking gcc for  __tread support  no
* Could not find a gcc  that supports the __treads directive!
* Please update to gcc-3.2.2-r1 or later, and try again.

!!! ERROR: sys-lib/glibc-2.3.4.20041102 failed!
!!! Function check_nptl_support, line 158, Exitcode 0
!!  No threed support in gcc!



i found another way then ali3nx' workound to prevent this bug. Before starting to bootstrap just make sure you get the latest gcc-config(1.3.7-r1 atm).
so simply do:
Code:

emerge --nodeps gcc-config

before executing the bootstrap script.
(remember to set ~x86 keyword for it if you're not doing a complete ~x86 install)
With this gcc-config the bootstrap runs through completely for me. emerge system also just finished without an error. So it seems to work this way ;)

CU
Imago
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
slycordinator
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 31 Jan 2004
Posts: 3060
Location: Korea

PostPosted: Fri Nov 26, 2004 1:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

For the C-compiler problems... it could be that you are using CFLAGS extensions for the wrong version of gcc.

Like starting with 3.4 you used -march just to tell the architechure and -mtune to compile optimized for that arch. But with versions before that one, -march alone does the optimization and it doesn't understand -mtune at all.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Documentation, Tips & Tricks All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 12, 13, 14 ... 23, 24, 25  Next
Page 13 of 25

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum