| 1 |
On Mon, 6 Oct 2003 08:07:29 +0200 |
| 2 |
Mathieu MILLET <htam@×××××××××××××××××.net> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 12:05:18AM -0400, |
| 5 |
> jwsacksteder@××××××××××××.com wrote: |
| 6 |
> > After 3 hours of chewing on the bootstrap script, glibc produced |
| 7 |
> > the following message. If you have successfully built |
| 8 |
> > glibc-2.3.2-r1, please let me know. |
| 9 |
> [snip] |
| 10 |
> > |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> glibc-2.3.2-r1 is broken on alpha. You need a patch that has already |
| 13 |
> been integrated in glibc-2.3.2-r6 (well maybe before, but I'm sure for |
| 14 |
> this one). |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> BUT 2.3.2-r6 has another problem and yet can't be compiled |
| 17 |
> too (I have already submitted the bug for 2.3.2-r6, cf. bug#30302). |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Yeah, I tried to build a cross-compiler for alpha on intel and came to |
| 20 |
the same error. I thought it was a error which happens only when I build |
| 21 |
a crosscompiler, it seems it isn't the case... |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
I asked myself (and now you) if it would be good if we place a new |
| 24 |
ebuild in the portage tree WITH the latest CVS version of glibc. It has |
| 25 |
a lot of fixes for alphas!?! |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
greets |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Marc |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
-- |
| 32 |
gentoo-alpha@g.o mailing list |
Archives