On Fri, Sep 21, 2007 at 11:21:34AM +0530, Althaf Backer wrote: > Dear LFS > Im really thankful for creation of a concept like LFS..... for > me this is a great gift.... > > OK lets come to the point ...... > > Details -- > Book version:--6.3 > Package section:--Binutils-2.17 > Distro:--Slackware 12 > Package section:--Binutils > Section is the book:--Part III. Building the LFS System > Error Message :-- > < > This error message is from 2.15 version compilation , > same error was prevalent in 2.17. > 2.15 was used for cross testing with 2.17
Except, this error is from 2.15.92.0.2, _not_ 2.15. Version numbers are important, and in this case you are showing us the messages from an 'HJL' binutils - a version prepared by HJ Lu for linux systems, and known to need extra packages to build in chroot. > > > |-- > . > ... > . > /sorc/binutils-build/binutils/arlex.c:1: multiple definition of `main' > arparse.o:/sorc/binutils-build/binutils/arparse.c:1: first defined here > ar.o: In function `main': - this looks like an error caused by missing flex in the temporary system. > /sorc/binutils-build/binutils/../../binutils-2.15.92.0.2/binutils/ar.c:342: > multiple definition of `main' > arparse.o:/sorc/binutils-build/binutils/arparse.c:1: first defined here > bucomm.o: In function `make_tempname': > /sorc/binutils-build/binutils/../../binutils-2.15.92.0.2/binutils/bucomm.c:425: > warning: the use of `mktemp' is dangerous, better use `mkstemp' > ar.o: In function `mri_emul': > ar.c:(.text+0xbc2): undefined reference to `yyparse' - and this is definitely caused by missing yacc (which we get from bison). This should not happen with the released book. > collect2: ld returned 1 exit status > make[3]: *** [ar] Error 1 > make[3]: Leaving directory `/sorc/binutils-build/binutils' > make[2]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 > make[2]: Leaving directory `/sorc/binutils-build/binutils' > make[1]: *** [all-recursive-am] Error 2 > make[1]: Leaving directory `/sorc/binutils-build/binutils' > make: *** [all-binutils] Error 2 > --| > Deviation :-- No I beg to differ. You've shown us classic symptoms of an attempt to build with HJL binutils without adding the necessary extra packages in chapter 5. If your "2.17" gave the same messages, I believe it was one of the 2.17.50 versions. So, were you using 2.17.50.something when you first got problems in chapter 6 ? If so, please retry with the exact versions in the book. If you are adamant that you were using the exact versions in the book, please show us the error messages. ĸen -- das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
