Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.2 GCC pass 1

2013-01-13 Thread Bill Thomson 
Tim Burress  variosecure.net> writes:

> On 09/03/2012 03:53 PM, Israel Silberg wrote:
> > checking for MPFR... no
> > configure: error: libmpfr not found or uses a different ABI (including
> > static vs shared).
> > make[2]: *** [configure-stage1-mpc] Error 1
> > make[2]: Leaving directory `/mnt/lfs/sources/gcc-build'
> > make[1]: *** [stage1-bubble] Error 2
> > make[1]: Leaving directory `/mnt/lfs/sources/gcc-build'
> > make: *** [all] Error 2
> 
> For what it's worth, I ran into the same problem but found that it was
> just a typographical error on the last line of the configure command,
> where --with-mpfr-lib is defined. Since it's the last line you may have
> truncated it during the cut/paste or something.
> 

Thanks for the help!  Turned out to be a typo just as you said.
(Force of habit - from working with PHP - made me put an s on the
end of include in the path specification) once corrected, the
compile went smoothly.  Thanks again!


-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.2 GCC pass 1

2012-09-07 Thread Baho Utot 
On 09/07/2012 01:12 AM, Tobias Gasser wrote:
> Baho Utot schrieb:
>> I always build all of LFS with -j4 or -j8 and it has not failed me.
>>
> so you just had very very much luck on your way...
>
> there are packages which CAN fail with parallel builds.

yes i know that, but I do not attribute my success using -j4 -j8 as luck 
as my builds are constent over many complete runs and four different 
machines two x86_64 and two i686 builds.  As I am currently developing 
my build ayatem I start from a clean position and build/rebuild 4 to six 
times on each box both i686 and x86_64 before I make a decision upon it.


>
> whenever i run into a problem, i just restart the package with -j1 which
> often solved the problem magically in the past...

Yes I will drop down to -j1 if necessary.

>
> i'm used to set -jX to the number of cores i have (currently -j8 on my
> i7) globally which speeds up the build-time significally.
>
> my system might be a little special, as i use a SSD and the working
> diretory for the builds is a tmpfs as i have 16g of ram available. thus
> disk-io is very very very fast.
>
> from the base LFS i have to overwrite -j8 for
> make grub
> make groff
> make / test udev
> test tar
> test patch
> test binutils

For the above list I only had trouble with the systemd version of udev.  
All the udev versions used in LFS-6.8 to 7.1 worked with -j4 without 
error.  Dropping to -j1 in the build phase fixed it.  But I am 
investigating it


> recently i had intermittent failures on both xulrunner and firefox where
> i build with -jX since a very long time. with version 15.0 the build
> fails at about half of the builds on my system. giving -j1 runs fine. i
> can use 8 cores in the mk_add_options MOZ_MAKE_FLAGS="-j8" but NOT in
> the MAKEFLAGS or the make-commandline!


I just set MAKEFLAGS  and if I get an error I just add make -j1 to the 
build script for that package.

I have not built BLFS so I may be in for some trouble?

-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.2 GCC pass 1

2012-09-07 Thread Richard Melville 
On 09/03/2012 03:53 PM, Israel Silberg wrote:
> > checking for MPFR... no
> > configure: error: libmpfr not found or uses a different ABI (including
> > static vs shared).
> > make[2]: *** [configure-stage1-mpc] Error 1
> > make[2]: Leaving directory `/mnt/lfs/sources/gcc-build'
> > make[1]: *** [stage1-bubble] Error 2
> > make[1]: Leaving directory `/mnt/lfs/sources/gcc-build'
> > make: *** [all] Error 2
>
> For what it's worth, I ran into the same problem but found that it was
> just a typographical error on the last line of the configure command,
> where --with-mpfr-lib is defined. Since it's the last line you may have
> truncated it during the cut/paste or something.
>
> One thing is just to try
>
> find /mnt/lfs/sources/gcc-build -name 'libmpfr*' -print
>
> and see if that gives you anything. If so, check to see if the path is
> what you have as the value for --with-mpfr-lib.
>
> Another thing you can do is look at
>
> /mnt/lfs/sources/gcc-build/mpc/config.log. Search for "libmpfr not
> found" and if you look above that a page or two you'll see the gcc
> command that's testing for libmpfr. It's trying to compile a program
> called conftest. See if the paths given in the -L directives there match
> what you gave for --with-mpfr-lib.
>
> You can even extract the code for conftest.c (it's down below the error
> message if I remember right) and try to build it yourself in
>
> /mnt/lfs/sources/gcc-build/mpc/
>
> using the gcc command line from config.log. Somewhere in the process you
> should see something that gives you a clue!
>
> Tim
>
>
Thanks Tim, those tips will be really useful for anybody who encounters
that problem again.

Richard
-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.2 GCC pass 1

2012-09-07 Thread Ken Moffat 
On Fri, Sep 07, 2012 at 07:12:42AM +0200, Tobias Gasser wrote:
> 
> recently i had intermittent failures on both xulrunner and firefox where
> i build with -jX since a very long time. with version 15.0 the build
> fails at about half of the builds on my system. giving -j1 runs fine. i
> can use 8 cores in the mk_add_options MOZ_MAKE_FLAGS="-j8" but NOT in
> the MAKEFLAGS or the make-commandline!
> 
 I noticed (a month or so ago) that fedora use a maximum of -j4 for
xulrunner (didn't check firefox) - I've only got a max of 4 cores,
so I didn't pay any attention to that.

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

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.2 GCC pass 1

2012-09-06 Thread Tobias Gasser 
Baho Utot schrieb:
> 
> I always build all of LFS with -j4 or -j8 and it has not failed me.
> 

so you just had very very much luck on your way...

there are packages which CAN fail with parallel builds.

whenever i run into a problem, i just restart the package with -j1 which
often solved the problem magically in the past...

i'm used to set -jX to the number of cores i have (currently -j8 on my
i7) globally which speeds up the build-time significally.

my system might be a little special, as i use a SSD and the working
diretory for the builds is a tmpfs as i have 16g of ram available. thus
disk-io is very very very fast.

from the base LFS i have to overwrite -j8 for
make grub
make groff
make / test udev
test tar
test patch
test binutils

as i don't check the makeflag on each new version, probably one or
another package meanwile would rund fine with -j8.


for python make and test run fine with -j8, but install requires -j1
(not always, but on rary occasions it fails as files are tried to be
installed into a directory not yet build by another thread)


recently i had intermittent failures on both xulrunner and firefox where
i build with -jX since a very long time. with version 15.0 the build
fails at about half of the builds on my system. giving -j1 runs fine. i
can use 8 cores in the mk_add_options MOZ_MAKE_FLAGS="-j8" but NOT in
the MAKEFLAGS or the make-commandline!


tobias




-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.2 GCC pass 1

2012-09-06 Thread Tim Burress 
On 09/03/2012 03:53 PM, Israel Silberg wrote:
> checking for MPFR... no
> configure: error: libmpfr not found or uses a different ABI (including
> static vs shared).
> make[2]: *** [configure-stage1-mpc] Error 1
> make[2]: Leaving directory `/mnt/lfs/sources/gcc-build'
> make[1]: *** [stage1-bubble] Error 2
> make[1]: Leaving directory `/mnt/lfs/sources/gcc-build'
> make: *** [all] Error 2

For what it's worth, I ran into the same problem but found that it was
just a typographical error on the last line of the configure command,
where --with-mpfr-lib is defined. Since it's the last line you may have
truncated it during the cut/paste or something.

One thing is just to try

find /mnt/lfs/sources/gcc-build -name 'libmpfr*' -print

and see if that gives you anything. If so, check to see if the path is
what you have as the value for --with-mpfr-lib.

Another thing you can do is look at

/mnt/lfs/sources/gcc-build/mpc/config.log. Search for "libmpfr not
found" and if you look above that a page or two you'll see the gcc
command that's testing for libmpfr. It's trying to compile a program
called conftest. See if the paths given in the -L directives there match
what you gave for --with-mpfr-lib.

You can even extract the code for conftest.c (it's down below the error
message if I remember right) and try to build it yourself in

/mnt/lfs/sources/gcc-build/mpc/

using the gcc command line from config.log. Somewhere in the process you
should see something that gives you a clue!

Tim



-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.2 GCC pass 1

2012-09-05 Thread Bruce Dubbs 
Ken Moffat wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 05, 2012 at 03:54:50PM -0400, Baho Utot wrote:
>>
>> Yes but what really is the difference if you cut and paste to a script
>> then run it instead of the tty?
>> What that gives me is a way of looking over what I had done when it
>> doesn't work. If I cut and paste to a term then I have lost that info.
>
> history | less
>
> When I'm editing, particularly in BLFS, or when I'm trying to fix a
> new build failure, I use that a lot.

Or 'history | grep configure', etc.   When you do have a problem line, 
you can always do 'command 2>&1 | tee file.log'

   -- Bruce

-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.2 GCC pass 1

2012-09-05 Thread Baho Utot 
On 09/05/2012 04:15 PM, Ken Moffat wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 05, 2012 at 03:54:50PM -0400, Baho Utot wrote:
>> Yes but what really is the difference if you cut and paste to a script
>> then run it instead of the tty?
>> What that gives me is a way of looking over what I had done when it
>> doesn't work. If I cut and paste to a term then I have lost that info.
> history | less
>
> When I'm editing, particularly in BLFS, or when I'm trying to fix a
> new build failure, I use that a lot.
>
> ĸen

Very good, Learned something today
-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.2 GCC pass 1

2012-09-05 Thread Mikie 
>Have you ever thought that the manual way does not have to involve typing? I 
>don't use scripts to build LFS (always manual for me :) ), but I do know how 
>to copy+paste the commands into the console and hit Enter.

>Elly

Yes and us Windows people can allways download putty.exe and instal Open SSH on 
the host.
Works great for me.

 
-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.2 GCC pass 1

2012-09-05 Thread Ken Moffat 
On Wed, Sep 05, 2012 at 03:54:50PM -0400, Baho Utot wrote:
> 
> Yes but what really is the difference if you cut and paste to a script 
> then run it instead of the tty?
> What that gives me is a way of looking over what I had done when it 
> doesn't work. If I cut and paste to a term then I have lost that info.

history | less

When I'm editing, particularly in BLFS, or when I'm trying to fix a
new build failure, I use that a lot.

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

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.2 GCC pass 1

2012-09-05 Thread Baho Utot 
On 09/05/2012 03:54 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Baho Utot wrote:
>
>> #!/bin/bash
>> set -o errexit# exit if error
>> set -o nounset# exit if variable not initalized
>> set +h# disable hashall
>> shopt -s -o pipefail
>> pkgname=
>> pkgver=
>> srcname="${pkgname}-${pkgver}.tar.gz"
>> srcdir=${pkgname}-${pkgver}
>> startdir=$(pwd)
>>
>> function unpack() {
>>tar xf ${srcname}
>> }
>>
>> function clean() {
>>rm -rf ${srcdir}
>> }
>>
>> function build() {
>># cut and paste here from the book
>>./configure --prefix=/tools
>>make
>>make -j1 install
>> }
>>
>> clean;unpack;pushd ${srcdir};build;popd;clean
> As a minimum, I'd add && after ./configure and the first make.
>
> There's a little more that can go wrong too.  The directory name is not
> always ${srcdir}, so each package needs some customization.
>
> I still feel that for most people, a manual build is useful.  For an
> experienced user like yourself, perhaps not so much.
>
> -- Bruce
>
>
I have it wrapped in a calling script that does a

trap 'echo Tool chain build failed...;touch /tools/FAILURE;exit 1' ERR

so if something fails this will catch it and won't let it continue.

-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.2 GCC pass 1

2012-09-05 Thread Eleanore Boyd 
On 9/5/2012 2:54 PM, Baho Utot wrote:
> On 09/05/2012 03:47 PM, Eleanore Boyd wrote:
>> On 9/5/2012 2:35 PM, Baho Utot wrote:
>>> One can not assume that if you do it manually that you will do it
>>> correctly every time. What if your some what dyslexic? Then the manual
>>> way is a great problem.
>> Have you ever thought that the manual way does not have to involve
>> typing? I don't use scripts to build LFS (always manual for me :) ), but
>> I do know how to copy+paste the commands into the console and hit Enter.
>>
>> Then it's the good old-fashioned "My code's compiling" excuse at work. :)
>>
>> Elly
> Yes but what really is the difference if you cut and paste to a script
> then run it instead of the tty?
> What that gives me is a way of looking over what I had done when it
> doesn't work. If I cut and paste to a term then I have lost that info.
... I should probably have added that if it breaks while compiling, I 
throw the directories out and try again. Of course, I've lost many, many 
builds that way, but I still have fun with it. :)

Just remember folks, "No one likes a smart ass."

Maybe I should get another email as something like that just for the 
heck of it...

Elly
-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.2 GCC pass 1

2012-09-05 Thread Baho Utot 
On 09/05/2012 03:47 PM, Eleanore Boyd wrote:
> On 9/5/2012 2:35 PM, Baho Utot wrote:
>> One can not assume that if you do it manually that you will do it
>> correctly every time. What if your some what dyslexic? Then the manual
>> way is a great problem.
> Have you ever thought that the manual way does not have to involve
> typing? I don't use scripts to build LFS (always manual for me :) ), but
> I do know how to copy+paste the commands into the console and hit Enter.
>
> Then it's the good old-fashioned "My code's compiling" excuse at work. :)
>
> Elly

Yes but what really is the difference if you cut and paste to a script 
then run it instead of the tty?
What that gives me is a way of looking over what I had done when it 
doesn't work. If I cut and paste to a term then I have lost that info.
-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.2 GCC pass 1

2012-09-05 Thread Bruce Dubbs 
Baho Utot wrote:

> #!/bin/bash
> set -o errexit# exit if error
> set -o nounset# exit if variable not initalized
> set +h# disable hashall
> shopt -s -o pipefail
> pkgname=
> pkgver=
> srcname="${pkgname}-${pkgver}.tar.gz"
> srcdir=${pkgname}-${pkgver}
> startdir=$(pwd)
>
> function unpack() {
>   tar xf ${srcname}
> }
>
> function clean() {
>   rm -rf ${srcdir}
> }
>
> function build() {
>   # cut and paste here from the book
>   ./configure --prefix=/tools
>   make
>   make -j1 install
> }
>
> clean;unpack;pushd ${srcdir};build;popd;clean

As a minimum, I'd add && after ./configure and the first make.

There's a little more that can go wrong too.  The directory name is not 
always ${srcdir}, so each package needs some customization.

I still feel that for most people, a manual build is useful.  For an 
experienced user like yourself, perhaps not so much.

   -- Bruce


-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.2 GCC pass 1

2012-09-05 Thread Eleanore Boyd 
On 9/5/2012 2:35 PM, Baho Utot wrote:
> One can not assume that if you do it manually that you will do it 
> correctly every time. What if your some what dyslexic? Then the manual 
> way is a great problem.
Have you ever thought that the manual way does not have to involve 
typing? I don't use scripts to build LFS (always manual for me :) ), but 
I do know how to copy+paste the commands into the console and hit Enter.

Then it's the good old-fashioned "My code's compiling" excuse at work. :)

Elly
-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.2 GCC pass 1

2012-09-05 Thread Baho Utot 
On 09/05/2012 02:01 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Baho Utot wrote:
>
>> I still think that helping others even if they have failed to follow the
>> book is a worthy goal as it shows where the book my be improved.  Who
>> knows by some not following the book new things are learned?
> I don't have problem with users not following the book.  It's just that
> sometimes an attitude comes across and that makes it more difficult to
> want to help.
>
> We always suggest a manual build for first time users.  Knowing how it
> is supposed to work is really useful before making custom changes.   It
> is 'Your distro, your rules.'
How ever if one has some previous experience in shell scripts the 
scripting build made be less problematic as cut and paste will reduce 
errors.  You can run/modify the script until you get it correct.  
Correcting each error as you go until you arrive at a good build.  This 
is what I did.  Using DESTDIR helps here as you get n number of do overs ;)
One can not assume that if you do it manually that you will do it 
correctly every time.  What if your some what dyslexic? Then the manual 
way is a great problem.

>
> IMO, building twice, the first time by the book without
> customization/scripts, really will save time in the long run.
>
>

I generally agree here but a simple script like this will catch a lot of 
simple errors.  If you do make an error, by examining you script for 
that package you could see very easy where you made the error.

#!/bin/bash
set -o errexit# exit if error
set -o nounset# exit if variable not initalized
set +h# disable hashall
shopt -s -o pipefail
pkgname=
pkgver=
srcname="${pkgname}-${pkgver}.tar.gz"
srcdir=${pkgname}-${pkgver}
startdir=$(pwd)

function unpack() {
 tar xf ${srcname}
}

function clean() {
 rm -rf ${srcdir}
}

function build() {
 # cut and paste here from the book
 ./configure --prefix=/tools
 make
 make -j1 install
}

clean;unpack;pushd ${srcdir};build;popd;clean
-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.2 GCC pass 1

2012-09-05 Thread Jasmine Iwanek 
On 2012-09-05 19:01, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Baho Utot wrote:
>
>> I still think that helping others even if they have failed to follow 
>> the
>> book is a worthy goal as it shows where the book my be improved.  
>> Who
>> knows by some not following the book new things are learned?
>
> I don't have problem with users not following the book.  It's just 
> that
> sometimes an attitude comes across and that makes it more difficult 
> to
> want to help.
>
> We always suggest a manual build for first time users.  Knowing how 
> it
> is supposed to work is really useful before making custom changes.   
> It
> is 'Your distro, your rules.'
>
> IMO, building twice, the first time by the book without
> customization/scripts, really will save time in the long run.
>
>-- Bruce

Thank you Bruce, You worded that far better than I had. (:

--
Jasmine Iwanek
-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.2 GCC pass 1

2012-09-05 Thread Bruce Dubbs 
Baho Utot wrote:

> I still think that helping others even if they have failed to follow the
> book is a worthy goal as it shows where the book my be improved.  Who
> knows by some not following the book new things are learned?

I don't have problem with users not following the book.  It's just that 
sometimes an attitude comes across and that makes it more difficult to 
want to help.

We always suggest a manual build for first time users.  Knowing how it 
is supposed to work is really useful before making custom changes.   It 
is 'Your distro, your rules.'

IMO, building twice, the first time by the book without 
customization/scripts, really will save time in the long run.

   -- Bruce



-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.2 GCC pass 1

2012-09-05 Thread Eleanore Boyd 
On 9/5/2012 11:20 AM, Jasmine Iwanek wrote:
> On 2012-09-05 16:46, Richard Melville wrote:
>> What is that supposed to mean?  Really, if you have nothing useful to
>> say then dont say anything.
>>
>> Thanks for your positive post Baho.
>>
>> Richard
> This is lfs-support, not
> Whine-like-a-child-because-someone-gave-their-insight-and-opinion-and-you-dont-like-it,
> Kindly keep the discussion on topic.
>
> As you say though, If you have nothing useful to say then don't say
> anything.
>
> Don't bother replying, mail filters are now set to direct your messages
> to /dev/null.
>
> --
> Jasmine Iwanek
What he's complaining about is your attitude when replying. Not only are 
you assuming that everyone knows what you're talking about, you think 
they're going to follow it without question.

Now, while I currently lean towards liking you, if your attitude in your 
messages continues, you'll be ignored by my filters.

Elly
-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.2 GCC pass 1

2012-09-05 Thread Jasmine Iwanek 
On 2012-09-05 16:46, Richard Melville wrote:
>
> What is that supposed to mean?  Really, if you have nothing useful to
> say then dont say anything.
>
> Thanks for your positive post Baho.
>
> Richard 

This is lfs-support, not 
Whine-like-a-child-because-someone-gave-their-insight-and-opinion-and-you-dont-like-it,
 
Kindly keep the discussion on topic.

As you say though, If you have nothing useful to say then don't say 
anything.

Don't bother replying, mail filters are now set to direct your messages 
to /dev/null.

--
Jasmine Iwanek
-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.2 GCC pass 1

2012-09-05 Thread Richard Melville 
>
> On 2012-09-05 15:34, Baho Utot wrote:
> > On 09/05/2012 09:55 AM, Jasmine Iwanek wrote:
> >
> > Leaping before looking is what I do well and it has taught me a great
> > deal.  Following a path by others may be a very good guide, but to
> > truly
> > learn requires ones to deviate from the beaten path and strike out on
> > your own.  How else can you create a truly giant mess in which to
> > learn
> > from?  Like taking LFS and adding pacman packager.
> >
> > By scripting your builds you learn a great deal about linux and
> > admin.
> > One also has the opportunity to learn some debugging skills.
> > Scripted
> > builds also give one repeatability once they are working.
> >
> > I have scripted my LFS builds and incorporating the pacman package
> > manager. I started with 6.8 and I am currently completing 7.2.  I did
> > so
> > that I can confirm that my scripts produce a proper build, i.e. it
> > was
> > tested over the four builds which gave me the opportunity to weed out
> > non apparent errors.  I then took those same packages produced by the
> > build and installed them onto 5 other machines so I could check to
> > see
> > if the build was generic for the i686 and x86_64 platforms.
> >
> > I now have a solid platform in which to create a distribution system
> > (
> > as well building BLFS ) as for the computers under my care.  I have
> > learned many things.
> >
> > I still think that helping others even if they have failed to follow
> > the
> > book is a worthy goal as it shows where the book my be improved.  Who
> > knows by some not following the book new things are learned?
> >
> > Helping others is always good.
>
> Oh, I agree with you fully, don't get me wrong, but people should be
> starting at the start, not the end.
>
> --
> Jasmine Iwanek
>
>
> What is that supposed to mean?  Really, if you have nothing useful to say
then don't say anything.

Thanks for your positive post Baho.

Richard
-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.2 GCC pass 1

2012-09-05 Thread Jasmine Iwanek 
On 2012-09-05 16:37, Richard Melville wrote:
>
> Who are you referring to here?  You make an awful lot of assumptions.
>
> Richard 

And yet you tell me that I should try reading all the posts.

--
Jasmine Iwanek
-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.2 GCC pass 1

2012-09-05 Thread Richard Melville 
>
> On 2012-09-05 13:34, Baho Utot wrote:
> > On 09/05/2012 08:17 AM, Jasmine Iwanek wrote:
> >> I've been bashing away at building LFS for a VERY long time, and
> >> done
> >> many many builds of 7.2, this problem has not hit me once, I would
> >> suggest you stop building GCC with MAKEFLAGS set to -j > 1, as was
> >> suggested.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Jasmine Iwanek
> >>
> >
> > I always build all of LFS with -j4 or -j8 and it has not failed me.
> >
> > Maybe those that do have a problem are all using a scripted build vs
> > those that don't have a scripted build?
> >
> > Suggesting that it may be only showing up in scripted builds?
>
> Could well be the case, aye, but that kind of backs the original point,
> as far as I can tell, we should not be having to support people who
> didn't follow the book instructions (or as was pointed out by bruce)
> didn't look before they leaped, after all, if you're unable to find the
> time to do even one build by hand, what hope do you have to find the
> time to properly script your builds and debug said scripts?
>
> --
> Jasmine Iwanek
>
>
>
Who are you referring to here?  You make an awful lot of assumptions.

Richard
-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.2 GCC pass 1

2012-09-05 Thread Richard Melville 
>
> On 2012-09-05 10:43, Richard Melville wrote:
> >
> > Thanks for the reply Steve ( and Eleanor earlier). ?Picking up on
> > what Bruce said about the possibility of race conditions relating to
> > building GCC with MAKEFLAGS set to -j > 1, Im wondering if there may
> > be a race condition affecting the GCC build with GMP, MPC, and MPFR
> > building inside the GCC directory at the same time. ?I have no proof
> > for this; its just a hypothesis, but I was wondering what others may
> > think. ?There is *definitely* a problem where the GCC build sometimes
> > fails at the same point each time (checking for MPFR), and then
> > builds
> > OK on a random attempt. ?Im not aware of the problem ever occurring
> > on
> > the final build of GCC where GMP, MPC, and MPFR are built outside the
> > GCC directory.
> >
> > Richard
>
> I've been bashing away at building LFS for a VERY long time, and done
> many many builds of 7.2, this problem has not hit me once,


Well aren't you the lucky one.  If you took the trouble to look back over
the mailing list you would see that a number of people have experienced the
error.



> I would
> suggest you stop building GCC with MAKEFLAGS set to -j > 1, as was
> suggested.
>
> --
> Jasmine Iwanek
>
>
> If you spent less time hectoring people and more time reading the posts
you would know that I'm quite aware of the issues surrounding the setting
of MAKEFLAGS.  What is your problem?

Richard
-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.2 GCC pass 1

2012-09-05 Thread Jasmine Iwanek 
On 2012-09-05 15:34, Baho Utot wrote:
> On 09/05/2012 09:55 AM, Jasmine Iwanek wrote:
>
> Leaping before looking is what I do well and it has taught me a great
> deal.  Following a path by others may be a very good guide, but to 
> truly
> learn requires ones to deviate from the beaten path and strike out on
> your own.  How else can you create a truly giant mess in which to 
> learn
> from?  Like taking LFS and adding pacman packager.
>
> By scripting your builds you learn a great deal about linux and 
> admin.
> One also has the opportunity to learn some debugging skills.  
> Scripted
> builds also give one repeatability once they are working.
>
> I have scripted my LFS builds and incorporating the pacman package
> manager. I started with 6.8 and I am currently completing 7.2.  I did 
> so
> that I can confirm that my scripts produce a proper build, i.e. it 
> was
> tested over the four builds which gave me the opportunity to weed out
> non apparent errors.  I then took those same packages produced by the
> build and installed them onto 5 other machines so I could check to 
> see
> if the build was generic for the i686 and x86_64 platforms.
>
> I now have a solid platform in which to create a distribution system 
> (
> as well building BLFS ) as for the computers under my care.  I have
> learned many things.
>
> I still think that helping others even if they have failed to follow 
> the
> book is a worthy goal as it shows where the book my be improved.  Who
> knows by some not following the book new things are learned?
>
> Helping others is always good.

Oh, I agree with you fully, don't get me wrong, but people should be 
starting at the start, not the end.

--
Jasmine Iwanek
-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.2 GCC pass 1

2012-09-05 Thread Baho Utot 
On 09/05/2012 09:55 AM, Jasmine Iwanek wrote:
> On 2012-09-05 13:34, Baho Utot wrote:
[putolin]

>> I always build all of LFS with -j4 or -j8 and it has not failed me.
>>
>> Maybe those that do have a problem are all using a scripted build vs
>> those that don't have a scripted build?
>>
>> Suggesting that it may be only showing up in scripted builds?
> Could well be the case, aye, but that kind of backs the original point,
> as far as I can tell, we should not be having to support people who
> didn't follow the book instructions (or as was pointed out by bruce)
> didn't look before they leaped, after all, if you're unable to find the
> time to do even one build by hand, what hope do you have to find the
> time to properly script your builds and debug said scripts?
>

Leaping before looking is what I do well and it has taught me a great 
deal.  Following a path by others may be a very good guide, but to truly 
learn requires ones to deviate from the beaten path and strike out on 
your own.  How else can you create a truly giant mess in which to learn 
from?  Like taking LFS and adding pacman packager.

By scripting your builds you learn a great deal about linux and admin.  
One also has the opportunity to learn some debugging skills.  Scripted 
builds also give one repeatability once they are working.

I have scripted my LFS builds and incorporating the pacman package 
manager. I started with 6.8 and I am currently completing 7.2.  I did so 
that I can confirm that my scripts produce a proper build, i.e. it was 
tested over the four builds which gave me the opportunity to weed out 
non apparent errors.  I then took those same packages produced by the 
build and installed them onto 5 other machines so I could check to see 
if the build was generic for the i686 and x86_64 platforms.

I now have a solid platform in which to create a distribution system ( 
as well building BLFS ) as for the computers under my care.  I have 
learned many things.

I still think that helping others even if they have failed to follow the 
book is a worthy goal as it shows where the book my be improved.  Who 
knows by some not following the book new things are learned?

Helping others is always good.

-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.2 GCC pass 1

2012-09-05 Thread Jasmine Iwanek 
On 2012-09-05 13:34, Baho Utot wrote:
> On 09/05/2012 08:17 AM, Jasmine Iwanek wrote:
>> I've been bashing away at building LFS for a VERY long time, and 
>> done
>> many many builds of 7.2, this problem has not hit me once, I would
>> suggest you stop building GCC with MAKEFLAGS set to -j > 1, as was
>> suggested.
>>
>> --
>> Jasmine Iwanek
>>
>
> I always build all of LFS with -j4 or -j8 and it has not failed me.
>
> Maybe those that do have a problem are all using a scripted build vs
> those that don't have a scripted build?
>
> Suggesting that it may be only showing up in scripted builds?

Could well be the case, aye, but that kind of backs the original point, 
as far as I can tell, we should not be having to support people who 
didn't follow the book instructions (or as was pointed out by bruce) 
didn't look before they leaped, after all, if you're unable to find the 
time to do even one build by hand, what hope do you have to find the 
time to properly script your builds and debug said scripts?

--
Jasmine Iwanek
-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.2 GCC pass 1

2012-09-05 Thread Baho Utot 
On 09/05/2012 08:17 AM, Jasmine Iwanek wrote:
> On 2012-09-05 10:43, Richard Melville wrote:
>> Thanks for the reply Steve ( and Eleanor earlier).  Picking up on
>> what Bruce said about the possibility of race conditions relating to
>> building GCC with MAKEFLAGS set to -j > 1, Im wondering if there may
>> be a race condition affecting the GCC build with GMP, MPC, and MPFR
>> building inside the GCC directory at the same time.  I have no proof
>> for this; its just a hypothesis, but I was wondering what others may
>> think.  There is *definitely* a problem where the GCC build sometimes
>> fails at the same point each time (checking for MPFR), and then
>> builds
>> OK on a random attempt.  Im not aware of the problem ever occurring
>> on
>> the final build of GCC where GMP, MPC, and MPFR are built outside the
>> GCC directory.
>>
>> Richard
> I've been bashing away at building LFS for a VERY long time, and done
> many many builds of 7.2, this problem has not hit me once, I would
> suggest you stop building GCC with MAKEFLAGS set to -j > 1, as was
> suggested.
>
> --
> Jasmine Iwanek
>

I always build all of LFS with -j4 or -j8 and it has not failed me.

Maybe those that do have a problem are all using a scripted build vs 
those that don't have a scripted build?

Suggesting that it may be only showing up in scripted builds?






-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.2 GCC pass 1

2012-09-05 Thread Jasmine Iwanek 
On 2012-09-05 10:43, Richard Melville wrote:
>
> Thanks for the reply Steve ( and Eleanor earlier).  Picking up on
> what Bruce said about the possibility of race conditions relating to
> building GCC with MAKEFLAGS set to -j > 1, Im wondering if there may
> be a race condition affecting the GCC build with GMP, MPC, and MPFR
> building inside the GCC directory at the same time.  I have no proof
> for this; its just a hypothesis, but I was wondering what others may
> think.  There is *definitely* a problem where the GCC build sometimes
> fails at the same point each time (checking for MPFR), and then 
> builds
> OK on a random attempt.  Im not aware of the problem ever occurring 
> on
> the final build of GCC where GMP, MPC, and MPFR are built outside the
> GCC directory.
>
> Richard

I've been bashing away at building LFS for a VERY long time, and done 
many many builds of 7.2, this problem has not hit me once, I would 
suggest you stop building GCC with MAKEFLAGS set to -j > 1, as was 
suggested.

--
Jasmine Iwanek

-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.2 GCC pass 1

2012-09-05 Thread Richard Melville 
>
> On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 4:23 AM, Richard Melville
>  wrote:
> >> I extracted all of these packages from within the GCC-4.7.1 folder
>
> 
> >
> > I'd still be interested to know why we build GMP, MPC, and MPFR inside
> GCC
> > except on the final build where they are built separately.
> >
> > Richard
> >
>
> During pass 1, GCC requires the GMP, MPC and MPFR libraries, but we
> don't want GCC to get these libraries from the host. GCC searches for
> the libraries either via the regular search paths *or* inside it's own
> source tree. We install a temporary copy inside the GCC source tree to
> take advantage of this, and thus allow GCC to not be contaminated with
> host libraries
>
> During pass 2, we are in a protected chroot environment, so we are no
> longer concerned about the host. So other programs in pass 2 can take
> advantage of the GMP, MPC and MPFR libraries later in the build, we
> install them before GCC instead of in the source tree.
>
> --
> -- -
> Steve Crosby
>
>
Thanks for the reply Steve ( and Eleanor earlier).  Picking up on what
Bruce said about the possibility of race conditions relating to building
GCC with MAKEFLAGS set to -j > 1, I'm wondering if there may be a race
condition affecting the GCC build with GMP, MPC, and MPFR building inside
the GCC directory at the same time.  I have no proof for this; it's just a
hypothesis, but I was wondering what others may think.  There is
*definitely* a problem where the GCC build sometimes fails at the same
point each time (checking for MPFR), and then builds OK on a random
attempt.  I'm not aware of the problem ever occurring on the final build of
GCC where GMP, MPC, and MPFR are built outside the GCC directory.

Richard
-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.2 GCC pass 1

2012-09-04 Thread Baho Utot 
On 09/03/2012 11:54 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Walter Webb wrote:
>> I just joined this list and can't respond properly.
>> I had a different file not found than Israel Silberg.
>> I unset MAKEFLAGS and retried, and it worked.
> Good point.  Using -j > 1 can cause problems in some packages.  It can
> cause race conditions that sometimes cause a failure.
>
> I suppose we can put a warning about this in the gcc sections, but we'd
> need it in three places.
>
> -- Bruce

On the other hand, I have compiled LFS-6.8 to LFS-7.1 ( will do 7.2 soon 
) with the following without error

MAKEFLAGS="-j4"
CARCH=x86_64
case $CARCH in
 i686)
 CFLAGS="-march=i686 -mtune=generic -O2 -pipe"
 CXXFLAGS="-march=i686 -mtune=generic -O2 -pipe"
 ;;
 x86_64)
 CFLAGS="-march=x86-64 -mtune=generic -O2 -pipe"
 CXXFLAGS="-march=x86-64 -mtune=generic -O2 -pipe"
 ;;
esac
LDFLAGS="-Wl,-O1,--sort-common,--as-needed,-z,relro"
export CARCH MAKEFLAGS CFLAGS CXXFLAGS LDFLAGS

I did have some trouble compiling gcc-4.6.[1,2] when using the host 
installed gcc (GCC) 4.7.0 20120507 (Red Hat 4.7.0-5)
I needed to patch the build for Chapter 5 pass-1 only and it was good 
after that.


-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.2 GCC pass 1

2012-09-04 Thread Israel Silberg 
Another day, another try.
I extracted the gcc again and did it again, and this time it worked.
Thanks all for your support.

On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 12:03 PM, Richard Melville <
richard.melvill...@googlemail.com> wrote:

> Walter Webb wrote:
>> > I just joined this list and can't respond properly.
>> > I had a different file not found than Israel Silberg.
>> > I unset MAKEFLAGS and retried, and it worked.
>>
>
> I'm glad you got it to build, but that's the conclusion of a simple
> empiricist.  It's like me saying that because I went to the kitchen and
> made a cup of tea before it built successfully, then it must have been the
> tea.  I also unset MAKEFLAGS from -j 2 and it *didn't* work for me.
>
>>
>> Good point.  Using -j > 1 can cause problems in some packages.  It can
>> cause race conditions that sometimes cause a failure.
>>
>> I suppose we can put a warning about this in the gcc sections, but we'd
>> need it in three places.
>>
>>-- Bruce
>>
>>
> There's already a warning near the beginning of the book.
>
> Richard
>
> --
> http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
> FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
> Unsubscribe: See the above information page
>
>
-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.2 GCC pass 1

2012-09-04 Thread Richard Melville 
>
> Walter Webb wrote:
> > I just joined this list and can't respond properly.
> > I had a different file not found than Israel Silberg.
> > I unset MAKEFLAGS and retried, and it worked.
>

I'm glad you got it to build, but that's the conclusion of a simple
empiricist.  It's like me saying that because I went to the kitchen and
made a cup of tea before it built successfully, then it must have been the
tea.  I also unset MAKEFLAGS from -j 2 and it *didn't* work for me.

>
> Good point.  Using -j > 1 can cause problems in some packages.  It can
> cause race conditions that sometimes cause a failure.
>
> I suppose we can put a warning about this in the gcc sections, but we'd
> need it in three places.
>
>-- Bruce
>
>
There's already a warning near the beginning of the book.

Richard
-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.2 GCC pass 1

2012-09-04 Thread Steve Crosby 
On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 4:23 AM, Richard Melville
 wrote:
>> I extracted all of these packages from within the GCC-4.7.1 folder


>
> I'd still be interested to know why we build GMP, MPC, and MPFR inside GCC
> except on the final build where they are built separately.
>
> Richard
>

During pass 1, GCC requires the GMP, MPC and MPFR libraries, but we
don't want GCC to get these libraries from the host. GCC searches for
the libraries either via the regular search paths *or* inside it's own
source tree. We install a temporary copy inside the GCC source tree to
take advantage of this, and thus allow GCC to not be contaminated with
host libraries

During pass 2, we are in a protected chroot environment, so we are no
longer concerned about the host. So other programs in pass 2 can take
advantage of the GMP, MPC and MPFR libraries later in the build, we
install them before GCC instead of in the source tree.

-- 
-- -
Steve Crosby
-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.2 GCC pass 1

2012-09-03 Thread Bruce Dubbs 
Walter Webb wrote:
> I just joined this list and can't respond properly.
> I had a different file not found than Israel Silberg.
> I unset MAKEFLAGS and retried, and it worked.

Good point.  Using -j > 1 can cause problems in some packages.  It can 
cause race conditions that sometimes cause a failure.

I suppose we can put a warning about this in the gcc sections, but we'd 
need it in three places.

   -- Bruce
-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.2 GCC pass 1

2012-09-03 Thread Baho Utot 
On 09/03/2012 03:51 PM, Israel Silberg wrote:
>
> And another thing, when you have a compiler you never know if a 
> software works because you wrote it good or because it has the 
> compiler's enviroment.
> Anotger question a bit OT, can a LFS be built from rpms so we will 
> have a comfertable way to update it?
>
>

[putolin]

I have built it using Arch linux pacman package manager which for my 
purpose is better.
-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.2 GCC pass 1

2012-09-03 Thread Baho Utot 

On 09/03/2012 01:24 PM, Israel Silberg wrote:


Thaks all for the replies,
Richard, what do you mean by puting it in a script to what is going 
on? How do I make the script write me the data I need?

I know some bash scripting but clearly not enogh :-)
And another question, if I want in the end tohave a LFS or BLFS system 
without gcc in it, shold I keep it in the toolchain or should I remove 
it when the system is done?
How can I remove it? Should I keep its installation folder and not 
delete it in order to do make remove?


On Sep 3, 2012 7:24 PM, "Richard Melville" 
> wrote:


I extracted all of these packages from within the GCC-4.7.1 folder
and the configure and make are from gcc-build
Here is the output for ls -lah of gcc-4.7.1

lfs@kitt-Lenovo-Product:/mnt/lfs/sources/gcc-4.7.1$ ls -lah
total 11M
drwxr-xr-x 33 lfs lfs 4.0K Sep  3 09:25 .
drwxrwxrwt  4 lfs lfs 4.0K Sep  3 09:27 ..
-rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs  38K Jul  4  2003 ABOUT-NLS
-rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs  18K Jul 14  2005 COPYING
-rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs  26K Jul 14  2005 COPYING.LIB
-rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 3.3K Apr  9  2009 COPYING.RUNTIME
-rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs  35K Jul 17  2007 COPYING3
-rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 7.5K Jul 17  2007 COPYING3.LIB
-rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 524K Jun 14 11:27 ChangeLog
-rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 3.2K May 13  2004 ChangeLog.tree-ssa
drwxr-xr-x  2 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:48 INSTALL
-rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs   58 Jun 14 11:48 LAST_UPDATED
-rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs  22K Feb 17  2012 MAINTAINERS
-rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 6.0M Jun 14 13:01 MD5SUMS
-rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs  25K Jan  2  2012 Makefile.def
-rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 1.4M May 16 18:54 Makefile.in
-rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs  67K May 16 18:54 Makefile.tpl
-rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 579K Jun 14 11:48 NEWS
-rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs  815 Oct 10  2009 README
drwxr-xr-x  7 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:35 boehm-gc
-rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs 3.7K Aug 22  2009 compile
drwxr-xr-x  2 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:35 config
-rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs  25K Mar 22  2011 config-ml.in

-rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs  44K Jun  6  2011 config.guess
-rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs  15K Feb 13  2011 config.rpath
-rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs  35K Nov  2  2011 config.sub
-rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs 458K Feb  2  2012 configure
-rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 101K Feb  2  2012 configure.ac

drwxr-xr-x  5 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:35 contrib
-rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs  19K Aug 22  2009 depcomp
drwxr-xr-x  3 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:48 fixincludes
drwxr-xr-x 17 lfs lfs  20K Sep  3 09:27 gcc
drwxr-xr-x 14 lfs lfs 4.0K May  6 14:20 gmp
drwxr-xr-x  2 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:37 gnattools
drwxr-xr-x  2 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:35 include
-rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs  14K Aug 22  2009 install-sh
drwxr-xr-x  2 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:34 intl
drwxr-xr-x  2 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:48 libada
drwxr-xr-x  4 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:48 libcpp
drwxr-xr-x  4 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:37 libdecnumber
drwxr-xr-x  7 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:48 libffi
drwxr-xr-x  4 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:37 libgcc
drwxr-xr-x  9 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:48 libgfortran
drwxr-xr-x  6 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:47 libgo
drwxr-xr-x  4 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 12:02 libgomp
drwxr-xr-x  4 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:35 libiberty
drwxr-xr-x  4 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 13:01 libitm
drwxr-xr-x 15 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:37 libjava
drwxr-xr-x  3 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:34 libmudflap
drwxr-xr-x  4 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:47 libobjc
drwxr-xr-x  5 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 12:49 libquadmath
drwxr-xr-x  3 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:48 libssp
drwxr-xr-x 11 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:34 libstdc++-v3
-rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs 3.3K Sep 20  2007 libtool-ldflags
-rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 258K Nov 21  2011 libtool.m4
-rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 1.8K Sep 26  2008 ltgcc.m4
-rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 244K Jan 13  2011 ltmain.sh
drwxr-xr-x  2 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:35 lto-plugin
-rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs  12K Dec  5  2009 ltoptions.m4
-rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 4.3K Sep 26  2008 ltsugar.m4
-rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs  703 Dec  5  2009 ltversion.m4
-rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 6.0K Dec  5  2009 lt~obsolete.m4
drwxr-xr-x  2 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:37 maintainer-scripts
-rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs  12K Aug 22  2009 missing
-rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs 2.2K Jul 22  2000 mkdep
-rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs 3.5K Aug 22  2009 mkinstalldirs
-rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs 2.6K Feb 12  2011 move-if-change
drwxr-xr-x  6 lfs lfs 4.0K Jul 19 15:46 mpc
drwxr-xr-x  9 lfs lfs 4.0K Jul  3 18:02 mpfr
-rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs 2.3K Jul 14  20

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.2 GCC pass 1

2012-09-03 Thread Israel Silberg 
And another thing, when you have a compiler you never know if a software
works because you wrote it good or because it has the compiler's enviroment.
Anotger question a bit OT, can a LFS be built from rpms so we will have a
comfertable way to update it?
On Sep 3, 2012 9:21 PM, "Bruce Dubbs"  wrote:

> Eleanore Boyd wrote:
> > On 9/3/2012 12:24 PM, Israel Silberg wrote:
> >> Thaks all for the replies,
> >> Richard, what do you mean by puting it in a script to what is going on?
> How
> >> do I make the script write me the data I need?
> >> I know some bash scripting but clearly not enogh :-)
> >> And another question, if I want in the end tohave a LFS or BLFS system
> >> without gcc in it, shold I keep it in the toolchain or should I remove
> it
> >> when the system is done?
> >> How can I remove it? Should I keep its installation folder and not
> delete
> >> it in order to do make remove?
>
> > Why do you want to remove gcc at all? If you want to add ANY new
> > programs at all, you'll need gcc in order to compile and install them
> > properly. Even if you want to use other compilers, they still need to be
> > compiled and installed with gcc prior to removing gcc at all.
>
> Removing gcc can do a couple of things.  First is saves some space.
> Second, it makes is more difficult for a bad guy to compile malware for
> the system.
>
> The original worm, the Morris worm around 1988, propagated itself via
> email where sendmail automatically compiled a program and ran it.  That
> hole has been closed for a long time, but in theory, the same thing can
> happen if the compiler is present.
>
>-- Bruce
>
> --
> http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
> FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
> Unsubscribe: See the above information page
>
-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.2 GCC pass 1

2012-09-03 Thread Bruce Dubbs 
Eleanore Boyd wrote:
> On 9/3/2012 12:24 PM, Israel Silberg wrote:
>> Thaks all for the replies,
>> Richard, what do you mean by puting it in a script to what is going on? How
>> do I make the script write me the data I need?
>> I know some bash scripting but clearly not enogh :-)
>> And another question, if I want in the end tohave a LFS or BLFS system
>> without gcc in it, shold I keep it in the toolchain or should I remove it
>> when the system is done?
>> How can I remove it? Should I keep its installation folder and not delete
>> it in order to do make remove?

> Why do you want to remove gcc at all? If you want to add ANY new
> programs at all, you'll need gcc in order to compile and install them
> properly. Even if you want to use other compilers, they still need to be
> compiled and installed with gcc prior to removing gcc at all.

Removing gcc can do a couple of things.  First is saves some space. 
Second, it makes is more difficult for a bad guy to compile malware for 
the system.

The original worm, the Morris worm around 1988, propagated itself via 
email where sendmail automatically compiled a program and ran it.  That 
hole has been closed for a long time, but in theory, the same thing can 
happen if the compiler is present.

   -- Bruce

-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.2 GCC pass 1

2012-09-03 Thread Eleanore Boyd 
On 9/3/2012 12:24 PM, Israel Silberg wrote:
> Thaks all for the replies,
> Richard, what do you mean by puting it in a script to what is going on? How
> do I make the script write me the data I need?
> I know some bash scripting but clearly not enogh :-)
> And another question, if I want in the end tohave a LFS or BLFS system
> without gcc in it, shold I keep it in the toolchain or should I remove it
> when the system is done?
> How can I remove it? Should I keep its installation folder and not delete
> it in order to do make remove?
>
>
Why do you want to remove gcc at all? If you want to add ANY new 
programs at all, you'll need gcc in order to compile and install them 
properly. Even if you want to use other compilers, they still need to be 
compiled and installed with gcc prior to removing gcc at all.

Elly
-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.2 GCC pass 1

2012-09-03 Thread Israel Silberg 
Thaks all for the replies,
Richard, what do you mean by puting it in a script to what is going on? How
do I make the script write me the data I need?
I know some bash scripting but clearly not enogh :-)
And another question, if I want in the end tohave a LFS or BLFS system
without gcc in it, shold I keep it in the toolchain or should I remove it
when the system is done?
How can I remove it? Should I keep its installation folder and not delete
it in order to do make remove?
On Sep 3, 2012 7:24 PM, "Richard Melville" <
richard.melvill...@googlemail.com> wrote:

> I extracted all of these packages from within the GCC-4.7.1 folder
>> and the configure and make are from gcc-build
>> Here is the output for ls -lah of gcc-4.7.1
>>
>> lfs@kitt-Lenovo-Product:/mnt/lfs/sources/gcc-4.7.1$ ls -lah
>> total 11M
>> drwxr-xr-x 33 lfs lfs 4.0K Sep  3 09:25 .
>> drwxrwxrwt  4 lfs lfs 4.0K Sep  3 09:27 ..
>> -rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs  38K Jul  4  2003 ABOUT-NLS
>> -rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs  18K Jul 14  2005 COPYING
>> -rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs  26K Jul 14  2005 COPYING.LIB
>> -rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 3.3K Apr  9  2009 COPYING.RUNTIME
>> -rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs  35K Jul 17  2007 COPYING3
>> -rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 7.5K Jul 17  2007 COPYING3.LIB
>> -rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 524K Jun 14 11:27 ChangeLog
>> -rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 3.2K May 13  2004 ChangeLog.tree-ssa
>> drwxr-xr-x  2 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:48 INSTALL
>> -rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs   58 Jun 14 11:48 LAST_UPDATED
>> -rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs  22K Feb 17  2012 MAINTAINERS
>> -rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 6.0M Jun 14 13:01 MD5SUMS
>> -rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs  25K Jan  2  2012 Makefile.def
>> -rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 1.4M May 16 18:54 Makefile.in
>> -rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs  67K May 16 18:54 Makefile.tpl
>> -rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 579K Jun 14 11:48 NEWS
>> -rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs  815 Oct 10  2009 README
>> drwxr-xr-x  7 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:35 boehm-gc
>> -rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs 3.7K Aug 22  2009 compile
>> drwxr-xr-x  2 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:35 config
>> -rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs  25K Mar 22  2011 config-ml.in
>> -rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs  44K Jun  6  2011 config.guess
>> -rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs  15K Feb 13  2011 config.rpath
>> -rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs  35K Nov  2  2011 config.sub
>> -rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs 458K Feb  2  2012 configure
>> -rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 101K Feb  2  2012 configure.ac
>> drwxr-xr-x  5 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:35 contrib
>> -rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs  19K Aug 22  2009 depcomp
>> drwxr-xr-x  3 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:48 fixincludes
>> drwxr-xr-x 17 lfs lfs  20K Sep  3 09:27 gcc
>> drwxr-xr-x 14 lfs lfs 4.0K May  6 14:20 gmp
>> drwxr-xr-x  2 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:37 gnattools
>> drwxr-xr-x  2 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:35 include
>> -rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs  14K Aug 22  2009 install-sh
>> drwxr-xr-x  2 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:34 intl
>> drwxr-xr-x  2 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:48 libada
>> drwxr-xr-x  4 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:48 libcpp
>> drwxr-xr-x  4 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:37 libdecnumber
>> drwxr-xr-x  7 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:48 libffi
>> drwxr-xr-x  4 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:37 libgcc
>> drwxr-xr-x  9 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:48 libgfortran
>> drwxr-xr-x  6 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:47 libgo
>> drwxr-xr-x  4 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 12:02 libgomp
>> drwxr-xr-x  4 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:35 libiberty
>> drwxr-xr-x  4 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 13:01 libitm
>> drwxr-xr-x 15 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:37 libjava
>> drwxr-xr-x  3 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:34 libmudflap
>> drwxr-xr-x  4 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:47 libobjc
>> drwxr-xr-x  5 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 12:49 libquadmath
>> drwxr-xr-x  3 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:48 libssp
>> drwxr-xr-x 11 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:34 libstdc++-v3
>> -rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs 3.3K Sep 20  2007 libtool-ldflags
>> -rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 258K Nov 21  2011 libtool.m4
>> -rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 1.8K Sep 26  2008 ltgcc.m4
>> -rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 244K Jan 13  2011 ltmain.sh
>> drwxr-xr-x  2 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:35 lto-plugin
>> -rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs  12K Dec  5  2009 ltoptions.m4
>> -rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 4.3K Sep 26  2008 ltsugar.m4
>> -rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs  703 Dec  5  2009 ltversion.m4
>> -rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 6.0K Dec  5  2009 lt~obsolete.m4
>> drwxr-xr-x  2 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:37 maintainer-scripts
>> -rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs  12K Aug 22  2009 missing
>> -rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs 2.2K Jul 22  2000 mkdep
>> -rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs 3.5K Aug 22  2009 mkinstalldirs
>> -rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs 2.6K Feb 12  2011 move-if-change
>> drwxr-xr-x  6 lfs lfs 4.0K Jul 19 15:46 mpc
>> drwxr-xr-x  9 lfs lfs 4.0K Jul  3 18:02 mpfr
>> -rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs 2.3K Jul 14  2005 symlink-tree
>> -rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs 6.1K Aug 22  2009 ylwrap
>> drwxr-xr-x 11 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:34 zlib
>>
>>
> I know it's frustrating -- it's the same bug that I and numerous others
> have experienced, but none of the team will accept that it's a bug.  It
> took me four or five attempts to get GCC to build, but my problem was at
> pass 2.  At one attempt I even copied and pasted the whole instruction set
> and it still failed at the same point that you've found.
>
> Bruce suggested

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.2 GCC pass 1

2012-09-03 Thread Bruce Dubbs 
Eleanore Boyd wrote:
> On 9/3/2012 11:23 AM, Richard Melville wrote:
>>>
>>> I'd still be interested to know why we build GMP, MPC, and MPFR inside GCC
>>> except on the final build where they are built separately.

> As I understand it, with the first two times the toolchain is being
> built, and GMP, MPC, and MPFR aren't actually needed as part of said
> toolchain. With the last build, you're building the final system, and so
> they need to be installed in the system before building the new system's
> compiler.

The only program in Chapter 5 that needs GMP, MPC, and MPFR is gcc and 
having gcc build them is easier than three additional sections.  In 
Chapter 6 they are separate so other programs can use them if desired.

   -- Bruce




-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.2 GCC pass 1

2012-09-03 Thread Eleanore Boyd 
On 9/3/2012 11:23 AM, Richard Melville wrote:
>>
>> I'd still be interested to know why we build GMP, MPC, and MPFR inside GCC
>> except on the final build where they are built separately.
>>
>> Richard
>>
>
>
As I understand it, with the first two times the toolchain is being 
built, and GMP, MPC, and MPFR aren't actually needed as part of said 
toolchain. With the last build, you're building the final system, and so 
they need to be installed in the system before building the new system's 
compiler.

Of course, I expect to be corrected by an editor who's been building it 
several thousand times a year. :)

Elly
-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.2 GCC pass 1

2012-09-03 Thread Richard Melville 
>
> I extracted all of these packages from within the GCC-4.7.1 folder
> and the configure and make are from gcc-build
> Here is the output for ls -lah of gcc-4.7.1
>
> lfs@kitt-Lenovo-Product:/mnt/lfs/sources/gcc-4.7.1$ ls -lah
> total 11M
> drwxr-xr-x 33 lfs lfs 4.0K Sep  3 09:25 .
> drwxrwxrwt  4 lfs lfs 4.0K Sep  3 09:27 ..
> -rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs  38K Jul  4  2003 ABOUT-NLS
> -rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs  18K Jul 14  2005 COPYING
> -rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs  26K Jul 14  2005 COPYING.LIB
> -rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 3.3K Apr  9  2009 COPYING.RUNTIME
> -rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs  35K Jul 17  2007 COPYING3
> -rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 7.5K Jul 17  2007 COPYING3.LIB
> -rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 524K Jun 14 11:27 ChangeLog
> -rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 3.2K May 13  2004 ChangeLog.tree-ssa
> drwxr-xr-x  2 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:48 INSTALL
> -rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs   58 Jun 14 11:48 LAST_UPDATED
> -rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs  22K Feb 17  2012 MAINTAINERS
> -rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 6.0M Jun 14 13:01 MD5SUMS
> -rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs  25K Jan  2  2012 Makefile.def
> -rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 1.4M May 16 18:54 Makefile.in
> -rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs  67K May 16 18:54 Makefile.tpl
> -rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 579K Jun 14 11:48 NEWS
> -rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs  815 Oct 10  2009 README
> drwxr-xr-x  7 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:35 boehm-gc
> -rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs 3.7K Aug 22  2009 compile
> drwxr-xr-x  2 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:35 config
> -rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs  25K Mar 22  2011 config-ml.in
> -rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs  44K Jun  6  2011 config.guess
> -rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs  15K Feb 13  2011 config.rpath
> -rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs  35K Nov  2  2011 config.sub
> -rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs 458K Feb  2  2012 configure
> -rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 101K Feb  2  2012 configure.ac
> drwxr-xr-x  5 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:35 contrib
> -rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs  19K Aug 22  2009 depcomp
> drwxr-xr-x  3 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:48 fixincludes
> drwxr-xr-x 17 lfs lfs  20K Sep  3 09:27 gcc
> drwxr-xr-x 14 lfs lfs 4.0K May  6 14:20 gmp
> drwxr-xr-x  2 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:37 gnattools
> drwxr-xr-x  2 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:35 include
> -rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs  14K Aug 22  2009 install-sh
> drwxr-xr-x  2 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:34 intl
> drwxr-xr-x  2 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:48 libada
> drwxr-xr-x  4 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:48 libcpp
> drwxr-xr-x  4 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:37 libdecnumber
> drwxr-xr-x  7 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:48 libffi
> drwxr-xr-x  4 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:37 libgcc
> drwxr-xr-x  9 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:48 libgfortran
> drwxr-xr-x  6 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:47 libgo
> drwxr-xr-x  4 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 12:02 libgomp
> drwxr-xr-x  4 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:35 libiberty
> drwxr-xr-x  4 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 13:01 libitm
> drwxr-xr-x 15 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:37 libjava
> drwxr-xr-x  3 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:34 libmudflap
> drwxr-xr-x  4 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:47 libobjc
> drwxr-xr-x  5 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 12:49 libquadmath
> drwxr-xr-x  3 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:48 libssp
> drwxr-xr-x 11 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:34 libstdc++-v3
> -rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs 3.3K Sep 20  2007 libtool-ldflags
> -rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 258K Nov 21  2011 libtool.m4
> -rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 1.8K Sep 26  2008 ltgcc.m4
> -rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 244K Jan 13  2011 ltmain.sh
> drwxr-xr-x  2 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:35 lto-plugin
> -rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs  12K Dec  5  2009 ltoptions.m4
> -rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 4.3K Sep 26  2008 ltsugar.m4
> -rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs  703 Dec  5  2009 ltversion.m4
> -rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 6.0K Dec  5  2009 lt~obsolete.m4
> drwxr-xr-x  2 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:37 maintainer-scripts
> -rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs  12K Aug 22  2009 missing
> -rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs 2.2K Jul 22  2000 mkdep
> -rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs 3.5K Aug 22  2009 mkinstalldirs
> -rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs 2.6K Feb 12  2011 move-if-change
> drwxr-xr-x  6 lfs lfs 4.0K Jul 19 15:46 mpc
> drwxr-xr-x  9 lfs lfs 4.0K Jul  3 18:02 mpfr
> -rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs 2.3K Jul 14  2005 symlink-tree
> -rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs 6.1K Aug 22  2009 ylwrap
> drwxr-xr-x 11 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:34 zlib
>
>
I know it's frustrating -- it's the same bug that I and numerous others
have experienced, but none of the team will accept that it's a bug.  It
took me four or five attempts to get GCC to build, but my problem was at
pass 2.  At one attempt I even copied and pasted the whole instruction set
and it still failed at the same point that you've found.

Bruce suggested wrapping the commands in a script so you can see what's
happening, and that seems like a good idea, however I had already built it
by then by doing nothing different -- just trying it yet again.

I'd still be interested to know why we build GMP, MPC, and MPFR inside GCC
except on the final build where they are built separately.

Richard
-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.2 GCC pass 1

2012-09-03 Thread William Harrington 

On Sep 3, 2012, at 06:33 AM, Israel Silberg wrote:

> Hi,
> Thanks for your reply.
> I extracted all of these packages from within the GCC-4.7.1 folder
> and the configure and make are from gcc-build
> Here is the output for ls -lah of gcc-4.7.1
>
> drwxr-xr-x 14 lfs lfs 4.0K May  6 14:20 gmp
> drwxr-xr-x  6 lfs lfs 4.0K Jul 19 15:46 mpc
> drwxr-xr-x  9 lfs lfs 4.0K Jul  3 18:02 mpfr


Also, the other problem would be that LFS_TGT isn't set.

We can tell by looking at config.log .  You should be the lfs user  
the whole time.
Double check your environment as created in chapter 4 when creating  
the lfs user.

Sincerely,

William Harrington
-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.2 GCC pass 1

2012-09-03 Thread Israel Silberg 
Hi,
Thanks for your reply.
I extracted all of these packages from within the GCC-4.7.1 folder
and the configure and make are from gcc-build
Here is the output for ls -lah of gcc-4.7.1

lfs@kitt-Lenovo-Product:/mnt/lfs/sources/gcc-4.7.1$ ls -lah
total 11M
drwxr-xr-x 33 lfs lfs 4.0K Sep  3 09:25 .
drwxrwxrwt  4 lfs lfs 4.0K Sep  3 09:27 ..
-rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs  38K Jul  4  2003 ABOUT-NLS
-rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs  18K Jul 14  2005 COPYING
-rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs  26K Jul 14  2005 COPYING.LIB
-rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 3.3K Apr  9  2009 COPYING.RUNTIME
-rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs  35K Jul 17  2007 COPYING3
-rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 7.5K Jul 17  2007 COPYING3.LIB
-rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 524K Jun 14 11:27 ChangeLog
-rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 3.2K May 13  2004 ChangeLog.tree-ssa
drwxr-xr-x  2 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:48 INSTALL
-rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs   58 Jun 14 11:48 LAST_UPDATED
-rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs  22K Feb 17  2012 MAINTAINERS
-rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 6.0M Jun 14 13:01 MD5SUMS
-rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs  25K Jan  2  2012 Makefile.def
-rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 1.4M May 16 18:54 Makefile.in
-rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs  67K May 16 18:54 Makefile.tpl
-rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 579K Jun 14 11:48 NEWS
-rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs  815 Oct 10  2009 README
drwxr-xr-x  7 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:35 boehm-gc
-rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs 3.7K Aug 22  2009 compile
drwxr-xr-x  2 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:35 config
-rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs  25K Mar 22  2011 config-ml.in
-rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs  44K Jun  6  2011 config.guess
-rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs  15K Feb 13  2011 config.rpath
-rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs  35K Nov  2  2011 config.sub
-rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs 458K Feb  2  2012 configure
-rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 101K Feb  2  2012 configure.ac
drwxr-xr-x  5 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:35 contrib
-rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs  19K Aug 22  2009 depcomp
drwxr-xr-x  3 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:48 fixincludes
drwxr-xr-x 17 lfs lfs  20K Sep  3 09:27 gcc
drwxr-xr-x 14 lfs lfs 4.0K May  6 14:20 gmp
drwxr-xr-x  2 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:37 gnattools
drwxr-xr-x  2 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:35 include
-rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs  14K Aug 22  2009 install-sh
drwxr-xr-x  2 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:34 intl
drwxr-xr-x  2 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:48 libada
drwxr-xr-x  4 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:48 libcpp
drwxr-xr-x  4 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:37 libdecnumber
drwxr-xr-x  7 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:48 libffi
drwxr-xr-x  4 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:37 libgcc
drwxr-xr-x  9 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:48 libgfortran
drwxr-xr-x  6 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:47 libgo
drwxr-xr-x  4 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 12:02 libgomp
drwxr-xr-x  4 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:35 libiberty
drwxr-xr-x  4 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 13:01 libitm
drwxr-xr-x 15 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:37 libjava
drwxr-xr-x  3 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:34 libmudflap
drwxr-xr-x  4 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:47 libobjc
drwxr-xr-x  5 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 12:49 libquadmath
drwxr-xr-x  3 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:48 libssp
drwxr-xr-x 11 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:34 libstdc++-v3
-rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs 3.3K Sep 20  2007 libtool-ldflags
-rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 258K Nov 21  2011 libtool.m4
-rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 1.8K Sep 26  2008 ltgcc.m4
-rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 244K Jan 13  2011 ltmain.sh
drwxr-xr-x  2 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:35 lto-plugin
-rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs  12K Dec  5  2009 ltoptions.m4
-rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 4.3K Sep 26  2008 ltsugar.m4
-rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs  703 Dec  5  2009 ltversion.m4
-rw-r--r--  1 lfs lfs 6.0K Dec  5  2009 lt~obsolete.m4
drwxr-xr-x  2 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:37 maintainer-scripts
-rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs  12K Aug 22  2009 missing
-rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs 2.2K Jul 22  2000 mkdep
-rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs 3.5K Aug 22  2009 mkinstalldirs
-rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs 2.6K Feb 12  2011 move-if-change
drwxr-xr-x  6 lfs lfs 4.0K Jul 19 15:46 mpc
drwxr-xr-x  9 lfs lfs 4.0K Jul  3 18:02 mpfr
-rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs 2.3K Jul 14  2005 symlink-tree
-rwxr-xr-x  1 lfs lfs 6.1K Aug 22  2009 ylwrap
drwxr-xr-x 11 lfs lfs 4.0K Jun 14 11:34 zlib


On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 11:22 AM, William Harrington wrote:

>
> On Sep 3, 2012, at 01:53 AM, Israel Silberg wrote:
>
> > checking for MPFR... no
> > configure: error: libmpfr not found or uses a different ABI
> > (including static vs shared).
>
> Most likely trying to use the host's installed mpfr.
>
> First extract the gcc tarball from the sources directory and then
> change to the directory created. Only then should you proceed with
> the instructions below. (note at gcc pass1)
>
> Example:
>
>
>
> cd $LFS/sources
>
> tar xf gcc-4.7.1.tar.bz2
>
> cd gcc-4.7.1
>
> tar -Jxf ../mpfr-3.1.1.tar.xz
> mv -v mpfr-3.1.1 mpfr
> tar -Jxf ../gmp-5.0.5.tar.xz
> mv -v gmp-5.0.5 gmp
> tar -zxf ../mpc-1.0.tar.gz
> mv -v mpc-1.0 mpc
>
> .rest of book commands for gcc pass1
>
> Section 5.3 is clear, the note of gcc is clear. not sure what else
> could be said to make it clear.
> Prerequisites are clear.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> William Harrington
> --
> http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
> FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
> Unsubscribe: See the above information page
>
-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/lis

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.2 GCC pass 1

2012-09-03 Thread William Harrington 

On Sep 3, 2012, at 01:53 AM, Israel Silberg wrote:

> checking for MPFR... no
> configure: error: libmpfr not found or uses a different ABI  
> (including static vs shared).

Most likely trying to use the host's installed mpfr.

First extract the gcc tarball from the sources directory and then  
change to the directory created. Only then should you proceed with  
the instructions below. (note at gcc pass1)

Example:



cd $LFS/sources

tar xf gcc-4.7.1.tar.bz2

cd gcc-4.7.1

tar -Jxf ../mpfr-3.1.1.tar.xz
mv -v mpfr-3.1.1 mpfr
tar -Jxf ../gmp-5.0.5.tar.xz
mv -v gmp-5.0.5 gmp
tar -zxf ../mpc-1.0.tar.gz
mv -v mpc-1.0 mpc

.rest of book commands for gcc pass1

Section 5.3 is clear, the note of gcc is clear. not sure what else  
could be said to make it clear.
Prerequisites are clear.

Sincerely,

William Harrington
-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.2 GCC pass 1

2012-09-03 Thread Jasmine Iwanek 
On 2012-09-03 07:53, Israel Silberg wrote:
>
> checking for MPFR... no
>  configure: error: libmpfr not found or uses a different ABI
> (including static vs shared).
> make[2]: *** [configure-stage1-mpc] Error 1
> make[2]: Leaving directory `/mnt/lfs/sources/gcc-build
> make[1]: *** [stage1-bubble] Error 2
>  make[1]: Leaving directory `/mnt/lfs/sources/gcc-build
> make: *** [all] Error 2
>
> I have done the tar and mv of the MPFR-3.1.1 for sure.
> Regards,
> Israel

The question is did you do them inside the gcc-4.7.1 directory as it 
states?

Could you attach the output of ls -lah run inside the gcc-4.7.1 
directory please.

--
Jasmine Iwanek
-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page