| 1 |
Fabian Groffen wrote: |
| 2 |
> When I did that, prefix was still in its early stage, and the ldwrapper |
| 3 |
> didn't exist yet. Almost for sure no runpath directions were set, and |
| 4 |
> maybe even no -L directions. Given that we have a better environment |
| 5 |
> regards the linking these days, it may be worth a try again... |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
Being able to emerge glibc would make my life easier too. I got farther |
| 8 |
on 64bit linux machines than x86. Both failed at an early stage. IIRC, |
| 9 |
glibc on 64bit would fail because it had an implicit dependency on |
| 10 |
linux-headers. The configure script searched for linux-headers in |
| 11 |
/usr/src/linux and my machine didn't have them there. So then I tried to |
| 12 |
emerge linux-headers (which I believe worked, after I ported |
| 13 |
dev-util/unifdef which is now in the tree) but glibc still didn't find |
| 14 |
them. At that point, I gave up due to time constraints. I suspect a |
| 15 |
configure.in patch would be required?? I would be interested in this |
| 16 |
working and if a bug report was created I could contribute again. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
HTH, |
| 19 |
Jeremy |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
PS. To the OP: please create a new message rather than replying to an |
| 22 |
old one and changing the subject. It screws up the threading on gmane |
| 23 |
and many mail clients. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
-- |
| 26 |
gentoo-alt@g.o mailing list |
Archives