Re: [gentoo-alt] Issues bootstrapping Gentoo Prefix on Arch Linux

[Joey Dumont]

Done: https://bugs.gentoo.org/760411

Thanks!

Joey Dumont (Profile <http://blog.joey-dumont.ca/>)
The supreme elegance of Nature lies in its apparent simplicity.


On Wed, 16 Dec 2020 at 02:04, Fabian Groffen <grobian@g.o> wrote:

> I think RAP simply pulls in attr, and we need to see if we can fix it.
> Can you file a bug for it on bugs.gentoo.org if you haven't yet?
>
> Thanks,
> Fabian
>
> On 15-12-2020 21:44:01 -0500, Joey Dumont wrote:
> > At this exploratory stage, I do not need a libc in my prefix. Arch is a
> rolling
> > release, so I currently glibc-2.32, which I believe is the latest.
> >
> > Good to hear that it's working on both Ubuntu and CentOS: those are the
> likely
> > platforms for any production work. I was mostly curious to see how it
> would fare
> > on my home system. It's a nice way of getting acquainted with portage as
> well.
> >
> > The PREFIX_DISABLE_RAP=yes bootstrap worked! This is enough for me on
> Arch
> > Linux, although I'd be curious to know why RAP fails. I just tried
> emerging attr
> > on my non-RAP prefix, and it also fails. Do you know if it's a function
> of the
> > host glibc?
> >
> > In any case, I think this is fine. I'll set prefix up on a CentOS or
> Ubuntu
> > system with a prefixed libc.
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Joey Dumont (Profile[1])
> > The supreme elegance of Nature lies in its apparent simplicity.
> >
> >
> > On Tue, 15 Dec 2020 at 02:55, Fabian Groffen <grobian@g.o[2]>
> wrote:
> > > I know this is not a small ask, but do you need a libc in your Prefix?
> > > E.g. do you anticipate one is neccesary because Arch's is too old?
> > >
> > > If not, could you try bootstrapping again from scratch with
> > > PREFIX_DISABLE_RAP=yes in your environment set.
> > >
> > > I see that yesterday's Ubuntu bootstrap (using RAP) succeeded, and the
> > > CentOS bootstrap succeeded not too long ago, so this may be a total
> > > pointless ask.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Fabian
> > >
> > >
> > > On 14-12-2020 20:59:52 -0500, Joey Dumont wrote:
> > > > I tried contacting the mailing list a couple times, but it seems my
> > > > messages weren't going through. Trying with plain text email, sorry
> if
> > > > I generated noise.
> > > >
> > > > I've been trying to bootstrap Gentoo Prefix on Arch Linux. However, I
> > > > am having issues during stage3. Specifically, I am having trouble
> > > > building sys-apps/attr-2.4.48-r4. Actually, it builds fine, but then
> > > > the symbol version sanity check fails:
> > > >
> > > >  * ERROR: sys-apps/attr-2.4.48-r4::gentoo failed (install phase):
> > > >  *   symbol version sanity check failed; please comment on
> > > > https://bugs.gentoo.org/644048[3]
> > > >  *
> > > >  * Call stack:
> > > >  *     ebuild.sh, line  125:  Called src_install
> > > >  *   environment, line 2163:  Called multilib-minimal_src_install
> > > >  *   environment, line 1501:  Called multilib_foreach_abi
> > > > 'multilib-minimal_abi_src_install'
> > > >  *   environment, line 1734:  Called multibuild_foreach_variant
> > > > '_multilib_multibuild_wrapper' 'multilib-minimal_abi_src_install'
> > > >  *   environment, line 1388:  Called _multibuild_run
> > > > '_multilib_multibuild_wrapper' 'multilib-minimal_abi_src_install'
> > > >  *   environment, line 1386:  Called _multilib_multibuild_wrapper
> > > > 'multilib-minimal_abi_src_install'
> > > >  *   environment, line  474:  Called multilib-minimal_abi_src_install
> > > >  *   environment, line 1491:  Called multilib_src_install
> > > >  *   environment, line 1965:  Called die
> > > >  * The specific snippet of code:
> > > >  *               die "symbol version sanity check failed; please
> > > > comment on https://bugs.gentoo.org/644048[4]";
> > > >
> > > > I've checked the symbols, and it does seem that the issue fits the
> > > > parameters of bug 644048:
> > > >
> > > > ~/software/gentoo/2020.12/tmp/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-readelf -sW
> > > >
> /home/valandil/software/gentoo/2020.12/var/tmp/portage/sys-apps/attr-2.4.48-
> > > r4/image/home/valandil/software/gentoo/2020.12/usr/lib64/libattr.so.1
> > > > | grep getxattr
> > > >     13: 0000000000000000     0 FUNC    GLOBAL DEFAULT  UND
> > > > lgetxattr@GLIBC_2.3 (7)
> > > >     26: 0000000000000000     0 FUNC    GLOBAL DEFAULT  UND
> > > > fgetxattr@GLIBC_2.3 (7)
> > > >     31: 0000000000000000     0 FUNC    GLOBAL DEFAULT  UND
> > > > getxattr@GLIBC_2.3 (7)
> > > >     43: 00000000000040e0     0 FUNC    GLOBAL DEFAULT   13
> fgetxattr@ATTR_1.0
> > > >     54: 00000000000040a0     0 FUNC    GLOBAL DEFAULT   13
> getxattr@ATTR_1.0
> > > >     62: 00000000000040c0     0 FUNC    GLOBAL DEFAULT   13
> lgetxattr@ATTR_1.0
> > > >     47: 00000000000040c0    24 FUNC    LOCAL  DEFAULT   13
> libattr_lgetxattr
> > > >     50: 00000000000040a0    24 FUNC    LOCAL  DEFAULT   13
> libattr_getxattr
> > > >     57: 00000000000040e0    23 FUNC    LOCAL  DEFAULT   13
> libattr_fgetxattr
> > > >     83: 0000000000000000     0 FUNC    GLOBAL DEFAULT  UND
> > > lgetxattr@@GLIBC_2.3
> > > >     89: 00000000000040a0     0 FUNC    GLOBAL DEFAULT   13
> getxattr@ATTR_1.0
> > > >     97: 00000000000040c0     0 FUNC    GLOBAL DEFAULT   13
> lgetxattr@ATTR_1.0
> > > >    113: 0000000000000000     0 FUNC    GLOBAL DEFAULT  UND
> > > fgetxattr@@GLIBC_2.3
> > > >    123: 0000000000000000     0 FUNC    GLOBAL DEFAULT  UND getxattr@
> @GLIBC_2.3
> > > >    127: 00000000000040e0     0 FUNC    GLOBAL DEFAULT   13
> fgetxattr@ATTR_1.0
> > > >
> > > > I tried adding the ebuild/patch attached to the bug above by adding a
> > > > local repo, and masking earlier versions of sys-apps/attr in
> > > > tmp/etc/portage/package.mask, but since the patch modifies a file
> > > > alled Makemodules.am, portage triggers automake-1.15, which is not
> > > > available on the prefix at this point. I tried installing it by
> adding
> > > > sys-devel/automake to the list of pkgs installed at this point, but
> > > > this fails at the install_qa_check_prefix stage, as automake contains
> > > > non-prefixed shebangs.
> > > >
> > > > What's the way forward here? Should I write my own automake patch to
> > > > fix the non-prefixed shebang? Or is that a known issue in Prefix with
> > > > a better (known) solution?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for any help!
> > > >
> > > > Joey Dumont (Profile)
> > > > The supreme elegance of Nature lies in its apparent simplicity.
> > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Fabian Groffen
> > > Gentoo on a different level
> >
> >
> > References
> >    1. http://blog.joey-dumont.ca/
> >    2. mailto:grobian@g.o
> >    3. https://bugs.gentoo.org/644048
> >    4. https://bugs.gentoo.org/644048
>
> --
> Fabian Groffen
> Gentoo on a different level
>