Hi,
I can not emerge firefox on a dual Opteron. I am getting:
OUTPUT ###
x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-g++ -o nsProfileLock.o -c -DOSTYPE=\"Linux2.6\"
-DOSARCH=\"Linux\" -I./../../xre -I../../../profile/dirserviceprovider/src
-I../../../dist/include/xpcom -I../../../dist/include/str
Hi Jules,
Jules Colding wrote:
[snip]
../../config/make-jars.pl: Could not get lockfile
/var/tmp/portage/mozilla-firefox-1.0.5-r1/work/mozilla/dist/bin/chrome/toolkit.lck.
[snip]
MAKEOPTS="-j3"
Try it with MAKEOPTS="-j2".
Zac
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
On Thu, 2005-07-21 at 19:12 -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
> Hi Jules,
>
> Jules Colding wrote:
> [snip]
> > ../../config/make-jars.pl: Could not get lockfile
> > /var/tmp/portage/mozilla-firefox-1.0.5-r1/work/mozilla/dist/bin/chrome/toolkit.lck.
> [snip]
> > MAKEOPTS="-j3"
>
> Try it with MAKEOPTS="
Jules Colding wrote:
On Thu, 2005-07-21 at 19:12 -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
Hi Jules,
Jules Colding wrote:
[snip]
../../config/make-jars.pl: Could not get lockfile
/var/tmp/portage/mozilla-firefox-1.0.5-r1/work/mozilla/dist/bin/chrome/toolkit.lck.
[snip]
MAKEOPTS="-j3"
Try it with MAKEO
On Fri, 2005-07-22 at 09:42 -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
> >
> [snip]
> > +++ making
> chrome
> /var/tmp/portage/mozilla-firefox-1.0.5-r1/work/mozilla/extensions/cookie =>
> ../../dist/bin/chrome/classic.jar
> > ../../config/make-jars.pl: Could not get
> lockfile
> /var/tmp/portage/mozilla-firefox
Jules Colding wrote:
On Fri, 2005-07-22 at 09:42 -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
[snip]
+++ making
chrome /var/tmp/portage/mozilla-firefox-1.0.5-r1/work/mozilla/extensions/cookie
=> ../../dist/bin/chrome/classic.jar
../../config/make-jars.pl: Could not get
lockfile
/var/tmp/portage/mozilla-
On Fri, 2005-07-22 at 10:54 -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
> Since you rebuilt from scratch, assuming that most other people can
> build successfully with equivalent settings, it seems like something
> in the toolchain (see output of "emerge --info") is actually is
> broken. Maybe it's just "make" itsel
On Fri, Jul 22, 2005 at 09:16:01PM +0200, Jules Colding wrote
> Nope, not make at least. Re-emerged make but still a problem with
> some lock files when emerging firefox with MAKEOPTS is >1. Disabling
> MAKEOPTS for now...
The problem is that you're specifying multiple parallel threads with
MAK
Hi,
"emerge --sync && emerge -vauDN" today gave me the following error.
--
jules
## Build Error #
../../dist/bin/xpt_link _xpidlgen/cookie.xpt _xpidlgen/nsIImgManager.xpt
_xpidlgen/nsIPermission.xpt _xpidlgen/nsICookieAcceptDialog.xpt
_xpidlgen/nsICookiePromptSe
On 05/07/23 13:38, Jules Colding wrote:
> "emerge --sync && emerge -vauDN" today gave me the following error.
[snip]
I'd think that the developers would rather have that information posted
to http://bugs.gentoo.org/ instead...
--
Regards,
Patrick Börjesson
PGP signature: http://pgp.mit.edu:1
Jules Colding schreef:
> Hi,
>
> "emerge --sync && emerge -vauDN" today gave me the following error.
>
> adding: skin/modern/communicator/cookie/taskbar-cookie.gif (stored 0%)
> adding: skin/modern/communicator/cookie/status-cookie.gif (stored 0%)
> +++ making chrome /var/tmp/portage/homedir
On Sat, 2005-07-23 at 14:50 +0200, Holly Bostick wrote:
> Well, since I just (literally, 10 minutes ago) emerged
> mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2, and had no problems on a 32-bit system, I must
> suspect that this is a 64-bit issue.
>
> In that regard, I see at least one thing in your emerge info that h
On 05/07/23 14:50, Holly Bostick wrote:
> Jules Colding schreef:
> > "emerge --sync && emerge -vauDN" today gave me the following error.
> >
[snip]
>
> Well, since I just (literally, 10 minutes ago) emerged
> mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2, and had no problems on a 32-bit system, I must
> suspect that
Patrick Börjesson wrote:
Oh, and despite what Patrick said, I think you were right to post here
first-- no need to clog up b.g.o with what might be a configuration
problem and waste developer's time closing an invalid bug.
I really don't see how this could be a configuration problem, sin
On 05/07/23 18:37, Richard Fish wrote:
> Patrick Börjesson wrote:
>
> >>Oh, and despite what Patrick said, I think you were right to post here
> >>first-- no need to clog up b.g.o with what might be a configuration
> >>problem and waste developer's time closing an invalid bug.
> >>
> >
> >I rea
Patrick Börjesson wrote:
When did I say that it wasn't frequent with configuration problems
leading to failed builds? I was (and anyone really reading my reply
would realize it) pointing to this specific failed build.
And I'm just curious; how would a configuration error (that the user
has
Holly Bostick wrote:
Well, since I just (literally, 10 minutes ago) emerged
mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2, and had no problems on a 32-bit system, I must
suspect that this is a 64-bit issue.
Nope. I emerged both firefox and thunderbird without issue on my AMD64
4000+ about 14 hours ago.
In that
On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 13:38:38 +0200
Jules Colding <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> "emerge --sync && emerge -vauDN" today gave me the following error.
>
I had no problem, on my amd64 system, emergeing firefox this morning -
[ I] www-client/mozilla-firefox (1.0.6-r2): Firefox Web Browser
Here is
Jules Colding wrote:
Hi,
"emerge --sync && emerge -vauDN" today gave me the following error.
[snip]
adding: content/cookie/contents.rdf (stored 0%)
+++ making chrome
/var/tmp/portage/mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2/work/mozilla/extensions/cookie =>
../../dist/bin/chrome/modern.jar
zip w
Zac Medico wrote:
Jules Colding wrote:
Hi,
"emerge --sync && emerge -vauDN" today gave me the following error.
[snip]
adding: content/cookie/contents.rdf (stored 0%)
+++ making chrome
/var/tmp/portage/mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2/work/mozilla/extensions/cookie
=> ../../dist/bin/chrome/
On 05/07/23 20:19, Richard Fish wrote:
> Patrick Börjesson wrote:
> > I'd think that the developers would rather have that information
> > posted to http://bugs.gentoo.org/ instead...
>
> To me, Holly, and I'd bet many others, the "instead..." in that line
> could only be read as telling the OP t
On Sat, 2005-07-23 at 11:51 -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
> Jules Colding wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > "emerge --sync && emerge -vauDN" today gave me the following error.
> >
> [snip]
> > adding: content/cookie/contents.rdf (stored 0%)
> > +++ making
> chrome
> /var/tmp/portage/mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2/w
On Sat, 2005-07-23 at 23:26 +0200, Richard Fish wrote:
> Hmm, since others with similar systems cannot duplicate the problem, I
> decided to capture all of the build output on my system (P4) and
> compare. Jules, there is definitely something not right on your system,
> but I don't know what ye
On Sun, 2005-07-24 at 14:22 +0200, Jules Colding wrote:
> On Sat, 2005-07-23 at 11:51 -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
> > Jules Colding wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > "emerge --sync && emerge -vauDN" today gave me the following error.
> > >
> > [snip]
> > > adding: content/cookie/contents.rdf (stored 0%
On Sun, 2005-07-24 at 01:02 +0200, Patrick Börjesson wrote:
> Although... I would suggest that the OP give a more explicit "question",
> since I was really not sure if it was a "anyone seen this before?", "I'm
> a n00b, please solve this for me!" or a "where should I take this to get
> it solved?"
On Sat, 2005-07-23 at 11:51 -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
> This seems like a continuation of the previous build problems that you
> have had with firefox (where we were discussing MAKEOPTS). Assuming
> that others cannot reproduce this (sorry, I don't have my amd64 right
> now), there's still somethin
Jules Colding wrote:
This could be a shot in the dark, but I think that you should remerge
your autoconf and automake packages to see if that affects this.
I'll be doing that.
OK, I get a segfault doing that:
## snip ###
test -z "/usr/share/automake-1.9/Au
On Sun, 2005-07-24 at 14:48 +0200, Richard Fish wrote:
> Well, since world includes system, if you want to rebuild *everything*,
> I would think the following should be sufficient
>
> emerge --oneshot gcc binutils
OK. What about glibc or is that just a part of "world"?
--
jules
--
gentoo
Jules Colding wrote:
On Sat, 2005-07-23 at 11:51 -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
This seems like a continuation of the previous build problems that you
have had with firefox (where we were discussing MAKEOPTS). Assuming
that others cannot reproduce this (sorry, I don't have my amd64 right
now), there
Jules Colding wrote:
On Sun, 2005-07-24 at 14:48 +0200, Richard Fish wrote:
Well, since world includes system, if you want to rebuild *everything*,
I would think the following should be sufficient
emerge --oneshot gcc binutils
OK. What about glibc or is that just a part of "world"?
On Sun, 2005-07-24 at 15:20 +0200, Richard Fish wrote:
> Jules Colding wrote:
> > Hmm... Among my USE flags is "nptlonly". Might that be a problem?
> >
>
> Well, nptlonly seems to work for a lot of people, so I don't think that
> should be a problem. I've only ever heard of it affecting old
> b
Jules Colding wrote:
>On Sun, 2005-07-24 at 14:22 +0200, Jules Colding wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 2005-07-23 at 11:51 -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
>>
>>>Jules Colding wrote:
>>>
Hi,
"emerge --sync && emerge -vauDN" today gave me the following error.
>>>[snip]
>>>
adding: content/cookie/
On Sun, 2005-07-24 at 16:28 +0300, Rumen Yotov wrote:
> Hi,
> Don't have any new idea, but could you check if there are some
> "hardened" USE-flags in your /etc/make.conf (like 'pic', 'pie',
> 'hardened' etc). Using some of them on a normal system may cause problems.
> HTH. Rumen
Nope, none.
Tha
Jules Colding wrote:
Hmm... I am seeing "(-multilib)" when doing the emerge of gcc and
binutils, so multilib is disabled by my profile and shouldn't be enabled
manually, right?
Could you double check the symlink /etc/make.profile. AFAIK, you want
it to point to /usr/portage/profiles/defau
Richard Fish wrote:
Jules Colding wrote:
Hmm... I am seeing "(-multilib)" when doing the emerge of gcc and
binutils, so multilib is disabled by my profile and shouldn't be enabled
manually, right?
Could you double check the symlink /etc/make.profile. AFAIK, you want
it to point to /usr/
On Sun, 2005-07-24 at 15:51 +0200, Richard Fish wrote:
> Jules Colding wrote:
>
> >Hmm... I am seeing "(-multilib)" when doing the emerge of gcc and
> >binutils, so multilib is disabled by my profile and shouldn't be enabled
> >manually, right?
> >
> >
>
> Could you double check the symlink /et
Jules Colding wrote:
On Sun, 2005-07-24 at 15:20 +0200, Richard Fish wrote:
Jules Colding wrote:
Hmm... Among my USE flags is "nptlonly". Might that be a problem?
Well, nptlonly seems to work for a lot of people, so I don't think that
should be a problem. I've only ever heard of it affec
On Sun, 2005-07-24 at 15:58 +0200, Richard Fish wrote:
> Richard Fish wrote:
> > Could you double check the symlink /etc/make.profile. AFAIK, you want
> > it to point to /usr/portage/profiles/default-linux/amd64/2005.0.
> >
> > But read this first before changing anything:
> >
> > http://www.gent
Jules Colding wrote:
>On Sun, 2005-07-24 at 15:58 +0200, Richard Fish wrote:
>
>
>>Richard Fish wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Could you double check the symlink /etc/make.profile. AFAIK, you want
>>>it to point to /usr/portage/profiles/default-linux/amd64/2005.0.
>>>
>>>But read this first before changi
On Sun, 2005-07-24 at 17:43 +0300, Rumen Yotov wrote:
> No experience with 64-bits, but a USE-flag in () means not supported by
> the profile. Have you changed profiles?
No.
Thanks,
jules
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Jules Colding wrote:
Hmm... Among my USE flags is "nptlonly". Might that be a problem?
I don't think so as I have that too.
Be lucky,
Neil
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 19:38:06 +0100, neil wrote:
> > CFLAGS="-march=k8
>
> I use k8. k8, opteron, etc., etc. are supposed to be synonyms as I
> understand it. k8 is the preferred one according to most sources I have
> read but, if they are truly synonyms, I'm not sure why one should be
> prefer
Patrick Börjesson schreef:
> On 05/07/23 18:37, Richard Fish wrote:
>
And it seems to me that if there is a bug, it might be a *documentation*
bug (because the other person who mentioned using march=k8 said that
that was the recommendation of the docs, but that seems to no longer be
>>
Jules Colding wrote:
On Sun, 2005-07-24 at 15:58 +0200, Richard Fish wrote:
Richard Fish wrote:
Could you double check the symlink /etc/make.profile. AFAIK, you want
it to point to /usr/portage/profiles/default-linux/amd64/2005.0.
But read this first before changing anything:
http:
On Sun, 2005-07-24 at 17:06 +0200, Richard Fish wrote:
> >The existence of lib32 indicates multilib capabilities, right? I do
> got
> >both /usr/lib64 and /usr/lib32.
> >
> >
> >
>
> How about /emul/linux/x86/lib?
Yes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~ $ ll /emul/linux/x86/
total 1
drwxr-xr-x 3 root root 1
On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 17:06:49 +0200
Richard Fish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Argh, I don't get it. /u/p/p/default-linux/amd64/2005.0/use.mask
> contains "multilib", but with a comment stating it is forced on when
> MULTILIB_ABIS is defined, and make.defaults has MULTILIB_ABIS="x86 amd64".
>
On Sun, 2005-07-24 at 11:10 -0700, Bob Sanders wrote:
> On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 17:06:49 +0200
> Richard Fish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> >
> > Argh, I don't get it. /u/p/p/default-linux/amd64/2005.0/use.mask
> > contains "multilib", but with a comment stating it is forced on when
> > MULTIL
Bob Sanders wrote:
On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 17:06:49 +0200
Richard Fish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Argh, I don't get it. /u/p/p/default-linux/amd64/2005.0/use.mask
contains "multilib", but with a comment stating it is forced on when
MULTILIB_ABIS is defined, and make.defaults has MULTILIB_ABI
On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 21:14:07 +0200
Richard Fish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Bob,
>
> Looking back at your previous post, I see you are still using the 2004.3
> AMD profile? Have you tried to upgrade to the 2005.0 profile? Does
> 2004.3 seem stable, and would you recommend that Jules dow
49 matches
Mail list logo
