Finally I'm building on 7.1, mostly using the packages I used for
7.0 - at this early stage (just got icewm built, now I'm in for the
long haul to firefox) the only real change is to use Python-2.7.3rc1
(updating an installed Python is unknown territory for me, so I'll
use the rc in this new build).  So, nothing else really changed - I
thought.

 But three times I've had build failures.  None of these directly
affect the book, but all had similar symptons.  The packages were
mesa-demos (I had been using that after the old patch didn't apply
to newer Mesa - current patch in the book for MesaLib is fine so I
went back to that), xclock-1.0.4 (I don't build all of X, didn't
notice the book had started to use a newer version), and icewm-1.3.7.

 In each case, ld reported an undefined reference, and told me which
library was needed, then said it couldn't read it.

e.g. in xclock-1.0.4 (the lines from ld itself have been reformatted
by pasting) -

/usr/bin/ld: Clock.o: undefined reference to symbol
'XmuCvtStringToBackingStore'
/usr/bin/ld: note: 'XmuCvtStringToBackingStore' is defined in DSO
/usr/lib64/libXmu.so.6 so try adding it to the linker command line
/usr/lib64/libXmu.so.6: could not read symbols: Invalid operation
collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
make[1]: *** [xclock] Error 1

 What I don't understand is why this suddenly shows up.  No changes
in my xorg versions, so no likely changes in which headers get
included.  AFAICS the only glibc change since 7.0 is that we now
always install the rpc headers, we're using 2.14.1 both times, but
I had to install them anyway for nfs.  So, a change in gcc-4.6.2 or
binutils-2.22 ?

 For icewm, google in lynx was adequate (result!) - debian had this
problem in March 2011 (almost a year ago) and fixed it by adding
' -lfontconfig' to the end of the 'LIB = ' line of src/Makefile.in
(they patch, I managed a sed - I hope Andy's pleased ;) - they also
had a similar problem with fvwm, but only on their amd64 build farm,
not on the package maintainer's machine.

 March 2011 appears to be before current gcc and binutils, even if
debian were using prerelease or hjl binutils.  So, I'm baffled by
what has triggered this spate of build failures.  Any ideas ?

ĸen
-- 
das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce
-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Reply via email to