Re: [gentoo-user] xorg emerge seg-fault -- NOT ram!
On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 08:57:30 -0500, Dave Nebinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > CHOST="i386-pc-linux-gnu" > > > > Why i386, could go i586, coudn't it? > > Because you never change the CHOST after the initial gentoo build. Besides, > the PIII is i686. Also, I guess you couldn't be bothered to read the poster's email: [quote] $ uname -a Linux tux 2.6.9-gentoo-r1 #5 Sun Mar 13 11:52:11 MST 2005 i586 AMD-K6(tm) 3D processor AuthenticAMD GNU/Linux [quote] Bad list habbit, isn't it. -- Joe -- Money can't buy everything. Sometimes money can't even buy a gun... -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] xorg emerge seg-fault -- NOT ram!
On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 08:57:30 -0500, Dave Nebinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > CHOST="i386-pc-linux-gnu" > > > > Why i386, could go i586, coudn't it? > > Because you never change the CHOST after the initial gentoo build. Besides, > the PIII is i686. > I believe you replied to the wrong person. :) I was trying to give Maxim some hints. -- Money can't buy everything. Sometimes money can't even buy a gun... -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] xorg emerge seg-fault -- NOT ram!
On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 08:57:30 -0500, Dave Nebinger wrote: > > > CHOST="i386-pc-linux-gnu" > > > > Why i386, could go i586, coudn't it? > > Because you never change the CHOST after the initial gentoo build. You can, as long as you run fix_libtool.sh after changing it. > Besides, the PIII is i686. So, why i386 then? -- Neil Bothwick WinErr 01F: Reserved for future mistakes of our developers. pgpkvskJACBVM.pgp Description: PGP signature
RE: [gentoo-user] xorg emerge seg-fault -- NOT ram!
> > CHOST="i386-pc-linux-gnu" > > Why i386, could go i586, coudn't it? Because you never change the CHOST after the initial gentoo build. Besides, the PIII is i686. -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] xorg emerge seg-fault -- NOT ram!
On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 14:01:48 -0800 (PST), maxim wexler
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello everybody,
>
> Thanks for all the hints to help with this
> not-fixed-yet-problem.
>
> Here's more info:
>
> $ gcc --version
> gcc (GCC) 3.3.4 20040623 (Gentoo Linux 3.3.4-r1,
> ssp-3.3.2-2, pie-8.7.6)
> Copyright (C) 2003 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
>
> $ uname -a
> Linux tux 2.6.9-gentoo-r1 #5 Sun Mar 13 11:52:11 MST
> 2005 i586 AMD-K6(tm) 3D processor AuthenticAMD
> GNU/Linux
>
> $ cat /etc/make.conf
> # These settings were set by the catalyst build script
> that automatically built this stage
> # Please consult /etc/make.conf.example for a more
> detailed example
> CFLAGS="-O2 -mcpu=i386 -fomit-frame-pointer"
You could confortably add mtune and march here, can't you? And the
settings should reflect your true hardware underneath.
> CHOST="i386-pc-linux-gnu"
Why i386, could go i586, coudn't it?
> CXXFLAGS="${CFLAGS}"
> MAKEOPTS="-j2"
> PORTAGE_TMPDIR=/var/tmp
> PORTDIR=/usr/portage
> DISTDIR=${PORTDIR}/distfiles
> PKGDIR=${PORTDIR}/packages
> PORT_LOGDIR=/var/log/portage
> #PORTDIR_OVERLAY=/usr/local/portage
>
> ie just the defaults suggested by the install doc. I
> commented out that last line IIRC because it caused a
> red exclamation point to appear next to it as the
> install process continued.
>
> The unit is fairly old(in PC years!) but the video
> card, a Radeon 9250, isn't.
>
> BTW, there is no /etc/portage/package.use file;
> there is only /etc/portage/sets -- an empty dir.
>
I once had a segfault problem, I then added the mtune, march flags,
and the segfaults were gone, might have been luck tho.
HTH
-- Joe
--
Money can't buy everything.
Sometimes money can't even buy a gun...
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
