| 1 |
i don't want to chroot to another profile just to use a 32bit double |
| 2 |
firefox.... i'm using 64bit firefox with wrapper and 32bit apps and it runs |
| 3 |
quite well. i don't want to use a double thing. there are lesser apps that |
| 4 |
go only on 32bit so i hope that i won't need the multilib profile for |
| 5 |
long.... |
| 6 |
anyway the find would remove me some crosscompilers, fact that i don't |
| 7 |
want.... and now i don't what the heck has happened since i can't compile |
| 8 |
anymore.... it gives me errors on gcc compiler.... i'll try reemerging it |
| 9 |
and see if i can do it.... i can't do it what should i do?! |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
2007/10/17, Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net>: |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> Beso <givemesugarr@×××××.com> posted |
| 14 |
> d257c3560710170112u6c8769a9j78eeb474899102d6@××××××××××.com, excerpted |
| 15 |
> below, on Wed, 17 Oct 2007 10:12:43 +0200: |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> > when i try to upgrade to glibc-2.6.1 from gentoo stable repo i get this |
| 18 |
> > error: |
| 19 |
> > |
| 20 |
> > ../include/sys/socket.h:21: warning: 'stdcall' attribute ignored |
| 21 |
> >> make[2]: *** [/var/tmp/paludis/sys-libs/glibc-2.6.1 |
| 22 |
> >> /work/build-x86-x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-nptl/tcb-offsets.h] Error 1 |
| 23 |
> >> make[2]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs.... |
| 24 |
> >> ../sysdeps/generic/initfini.c:1: error: CPU you selected does not |
| 25 |
> >> support x86-64 instruction set ../sysdeps/generic/initfini.c:1: error: |
| 26 |
> >> CPU you selected does not support x86-64 instruction set |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> Did you ever have the eselect-compiler module, aka gcc-config-2.0, |
| 29 |
> installed? Presumably you've removed it now if you did, but the unmerge |
| 30 |
> left some files behind that triggered frustrating errors such as this at |
| 31 |
> times. Let's see if I can find the bug, which has a command that can be |
| 32 |
> run to trace down and remove these files (be sure to read my comment on |
| 33 |
> the bug, as the initial form of the command as posted caused problems for |
| 34 |
> a number of people, removing too much stuff due to bad quoting)... |
| 35 |
> |
| 36 |
> OK, here we are: http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=133209 |
| 37 |
> |
| 38 |
> Pay particular attention to comments 25,35,39. |
| 39 |
> |
| 40 |
> That may or may not be your problem, but if it is, it's a fairly easy fix |
| 41 |
> for what can be an otherwise extremely frustrating problem. |
| 42 |
> |
| 43 |
> FWIW, a few months ago I finally decided to switch to the 64-bit only no- |
| 44 |
> multilib profile here, since I won't merge binary-only stuff here anyway |
| 45 |
> out of principle, and that's mainly why one would need 32-bit |
| 46 |
> compatibility as virtually any commonly used freedomware is long since |
| 47 |
> ported. Less problems, and compiling gcc and glibc take MUCH less time |
| 48 |
> now, since only the 64-bit stuff has to be compiled, not the 32-bit stuff |
| 49 |
> as well. If I did do 32-bit, I'd now go the 32-bit chroot route, |
| 50 |
> installing from a full 32-bit stage-3 thus keeping 32-bit and 64-bit |
| 51 |
> separate, instead of fooling with the multilib stuff. Less problems that |
| 52 |
> way, and when there /is/ a problem, it's far more likely to be limited to |
| 53 |
> one bitness or the other, not some weird combination of both. Those dual- |
| 54 |
> bitness problems aren't common, but they are sure frustrating to try to |
| 55 |
> figure out and solve, so eliminating that entire class of problem was at |
| 56 |
> least for me a good choice; one I'd have made much earlier if I had it to |
| 57 |
> do over again. |
| 58 |
> |
| 59 |
> -- |
| 60 |
> Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. |
| 61 |
> "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- |
| 62 |
> and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman |
| 63 |
> |
| 64 |
> -- |
| 65 |
> gentoo-amd64@g.o mailing list |
| 66 |
> |
| 67 |
> |
| 68 |
|
| 69 |
|
| 70 |
-- |
| 71 |
dott. ing. beso |
Archives