List Archive: gentoo-alpha
Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date.
provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.c.f. bug 424647
On Mon, May 28, 2007 at 05:11:56PM +0200, Davide Cittaro wrote:
> On May 28, 2007, at 5:06 PM, Bryan Østergaard wrote:
> >On Mon, May 28, 2007 at 04:01:15PM +0200, Davide Cittaro wrote:
> >>Hi all, I've found that glibc 2.5+ cannot be compiled on my alpha, as
> >>reported on gentoo bugzilla by another person.
> >>I have a couple of questions, then:
> >>1- it is safe to use '-nptlonly' flag?
> >Not really. In the past we've found Linuxthreads to be unstable and
> >nptlonly is much preferred for that reason (we had programs randomly
> >crashing with Linuxthreads and no problems with NPTL).
> After 1 hour of building I've discovered that glibc doesn't compile
> even without nptlonly flag
> >>2- when the patched glibc will be available in portage (comment 2 of
> >>that bug has been posted one week ago)?
> >As soon as glibc upstream fixes the problem. Meanwhile you have two
> >different options.
> >1. Upgrade to binutils >=18.104.22.168.15 and risk possible unknown bugs
> >from doing so.
> >2. Ignoring glibc-2.5 updates until upstream fixes the issue.
> >My recommendation would be to wait and not try to work around the
> Unfortunately I have strict times and this general system update has
> been scheduled for this week. Since glibc-2.5-r2 is marked stable on
> alpha I thought I wouldn't run into such issues... :-(
> If I upgrade binutils can I use both nptl* flags?
I'd still recommend putting this particular update off tbh. I would have
stabled binutils-22.214.171.124 already if I was sure it wouldn't cause
other problems. As it is we really haven't tested it well enough to
stable it yet and you can't downgrade binutils again if it turns out to
be a bad idea running .2.17.50.*.
That said, if you really really want to go through with this then
126.96.36.199 does solve the glibc compilation problems with nptlonly.
email@example.com mailing list