Re: [gentoo-embedded] 2 missing files from portage tree

[Ned Ludd]

On Wed, 2004-06-30 at 06:11, Peter S. Mazinger wrote:
> On 29 Jun 2004, Ned Ludd wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 2004-06-29 at 10:37, Peter S. Mazinger wrote:
> > > On 29 Jun 2004, Ned Ludd wrote:
> > >
> > > > You might want to look over the uclibc build itself. looks like theres a
> > > > few cases in which the SYS_LIBC wont be defined namely inside of the
> > > > src_compile(), src_install() where no calls to check_main_libc() are
> > > > made.
> > >
> >
> >
> > > Would you solve this some other way, or should we use only use uclibc (if
> > > it is set, we are building natively, else in glibc env)?
> >
> > Well I'm trying to approach this with you from a glibc->uclibc
> > conversion so that would mean that this line in the check_main_libc()
> > wont ever be triggered.
> > [ -f /lib/lib${MY_P}.so -a ! -f /lib/libc.so.6 ]
>
> a direct conversion is not possible, because we have to replace the
> include files from one to the other, (also the static libs will
> conflict) it can be done only into another subdir (as buildroot)
I've been learning this one the hard way..

If you could post an uclibc i386 built portage package. 
(Preferably >=portage-2.0.51_pre12.tbz2 FEATURES="autoconfig"
USE="build")
I could probably fill in the missing other packages and get the
equivalent of a stage1 to work from.

>
> Peter
>
>
> --
> gentoo-embedded@g.o mailing list
-- 
Ned Ludd <solar@g.o>
Gentoo (hardened,security,infrastructure,embedded,toolchain) Developer