| 1 |
On 25 Jun 2004, Ned Ludd wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> On Fri, 2004-06-25 at 09:27, Peter S. Mazinger wrote: |
| 4 |
> > Hello! |
| 5 |
> > |
| 6 |
> > some corrections and/or missing changes for uclibc support |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> tar updated |
| 9 |
> perl updated |
| 10 |
> openssl updated |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> binutils-2.15.91.0.1-r2 - |
| 13 |
> binutils - 2.14.90.0.8-r2 |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> This type of logic is not desired. |
| 16 |
> use uclibc && rm -f ${WORKDIR}/patch/*relro* && rm -rf |
| 17 |
> ${WORKDIR}/patch/*sparc1* || die |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> Can you rewrite this one and repost it with 'if ; then ; else ; fi' |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
I do not know what is not ok with my logic, so please change it as you |
| 22 |
please |
| 23 |
Now there are numbers that are used, I do not like it, because I want to |
| 24 |
know what I remove (in this case all the relro related patches, and a |
| 25 |
patch for sparc that could be ported) |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
> gcc-3.4.0-r6 - I'll run this by somebody that works on 3.4.x |
| 28 |
> db-4.1.25_p1-r4 - I'll do this one in a few mins |
| 29 |
> catalyst-1.0.7 - Only zhen/releng can make cvs commits on this one. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
catalyst is not so important for now, because none of you gave me an idea |
| 32 |
how to produce a stage1/2/3 from tbz2 files, so I can't test stage building. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
> |
| 35 |
> Now assuming we get all the updates in where does this put us in your |
| 36 |
> minds eye? |
| 37 |
> I've got people asking me about uclibc by the boatload now. |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
Due to the fact that not all patches were "accepted" you are missing |
| 40 |
following to really build an uclibc based system starting from buildroot + |
| 41 |
portage manually installed: |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
config.sub/config.guess is updated by me all the time by econf, only |
| 44 |
those ebuilds got addition use uclibc && gnuconfig_update, that do not run |
| 45 |
econf, only use directly ./configure (the most of them should be corrected |
| 46 |
to use econf, but I wanted to hold my diffs at minimum, so that they are |
| 47 |
acceptable). There are also about 5-6 different versions of these files |
| 48 |
on the system, libtool and automakes, gnuconfig are delivering them, I |
| 49 |
have done patches for this, to use only one, but haven't seen them |
| 50 |
accepted (see my first patch related to gnuconfig-uclibc), If you do not |
| 51 |
remove all the diff. versions and use a "well known" one, updating lets |
| 52 |
say libtool brings a newer config.guess, but this one was forgotten to be |
| 53 |
patched for uclibc. After this step you can't build any libs for sure for |
| 54 |
uclibc (that's why I wanted the provide gnuconfig-uclibc, to be really |
| 55 |
sure about uclibc proper version) |
| 56 |
I can't accept an approach, to add use uclibc && gnuconfig_update to all |
| 57 |
ebuild that are used w/ uclibc. |
| 58 |
|
| 59 |
I have attached my "last bits" from the uclibc overlay directory, so |
| 60 |
you'll see what I am using (these were already sent earlier) |
| 61 |
|
| 62 |
Another problem that will surely arise, the uclibc patches are not |
| 63 |
everywhere in the newest releases, and also if they are there, some devs |
| 64 |
are ignoring them, leaving them out (see openssl), so who will check for each |
| 65 |
update, that someone didn't removed the known uclibc support from one |
| 66 |
package. Most of the uclibc patches are not influencing the normal |
| 67 |
functionality, so they could apply unconditionally, maybe if they won't |
| 68 |
get use uclibc, they will mostly remain in, so the devs will try to |
| 69 |
update/port them to newer versions. |
| 70 |
|
| 71 |
On a side note: |
| 72 |
tar ~arch is faulty on uclibc (tar jtf does not work on the created tbz2 |
| 73 |
files), only the stable one (1.13.92-r3) works. How can it be done to use |
| 74 |
exclusively this version for uclibc? Should this be done in the profile |
| 75 |
enforcing some version? |
| 76 |
|
| 77 |
Peter |
Archives