BINGO! Mark ... you're a genius. Thank you.
> Hmm. If the weak declaration is still in that file, then the patch was
> _not_ applied. Here's what the section of code looks like on my system
> after all the patches are put on:
Well ... I saw the code for myself, and it doesn't match yours.
(libc, _new_sys_errlist, sys_errlist, GLIBC_2_1);
No weak alias definitions at all.
Mark Post
-Original Message-
From: Rick Troth [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2003 5:16 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: stuck on the staged [re]build
> Perhaps so, but if I
> Perhaps so, but if I were you, I'd visually inspect the
> errlist.c file, just to be sure.
I did.
Swapping the "strong" and "weak" declaration *seems* to let it build.
But I then ran into other errors, so it will be some time before I
will know if that fixes it. Also, I really had hoped to d
Perhaps so, but if I were you, I'd visually inspect the errlist.c file, just
to be sure.
Mark
-Original Message-
From: Rick Troth [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2003 5:01 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: stuck on the staged [re]build
> I did s
> I did some more digging. The glibc problem is fixed with the
> DeveloperWorks patch glibc-2.2.5-s390-2-may2002.tar.gz from 2002-08-16.
I have that patch applied
(to both iterations of GLIBC, the one that works
and the 'chroot' rebuild that fails).
The search continues!
-- RMT
: Re: stuck on the staged [re]build
> The glibc error seems familiar. I think I got it when I was trying to
> compile glibc 2.2.5 with gcc 2.95.2/3.
Yeah ... good suggestion. This is 3.2.
I've brought the latest BINUTILS, GCC, GLIBC
as well as more than a dozen supporting packages.
> The glibc error seems familiar. I think I got it when I was trying to
> compile glibc 2.2.5 with gcc 2.95.2/3.
Yeah ... good suggestion. This is 3.2.
I've brought the latest BINUTILS, GCC, GLIBC
as well as more than a dozen supporting packages. All very current.
The GLIBC error looks almos
The glibc error seems familiar. I think I got it when I was trying to
compile glibc 2.2.5 with gcc 2.95.2/3.
Mark Post
-Original Message-
From: Rick Troth [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2003 2:46 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: stuck on the staged [re]build
I'm trying to cobble-up a staged [re]build of the system,
based initially on the tool chain as indicated on DeveloperWorks.
Most of it works alright, but I keep bumping into a couple of errors.
Hard to tell if this is a chicken-and-egg scenario, but it doesn't
*look* like that. Most or all of t
