sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List
List archive
Re: [SM-Discuss] Re[2]: [SM-Grimoire]Problems compiling gcc-3.2.1
- From: Dufflebunk <dufflebunk AT dufflebunk.homeip.net>
- To: "Sergey A. Lipnevich" <sergeyli AT pisem.net>
- Cc: Mark Andrews <msasgl AT msa-enterprises.com>, <sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org>
- Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] Re[2]: [SM-Grimoire]Problems compiling gcc-3.2.1
- Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2002 13:05:08 -0500 (EST)
FYI: There was a problem with triggers not working for a few weeks. The
triggers would be registered, but wouldn't be checked. This problem was
fixed about two or three weeks ago. I don't know if that has any bearing
on the problem.
On Thu, 12 Dec 2002, Sergey A. Lipnevich wrote:
> Guys,
>
> I'm sorry but you seem to only read what you post and nothing else.
> gettext 0.11.5 is breaking glibc and Julian added a trigger to rebuild
> glibc when gettext is updated, but it looks like the vast differences in
> sorcery versions installed and maybe some issues with trigger processing
> don't invoke this trigger. Search the lists.
>
> Mark, kernel headers are the exception and are not processed as
> everything else in sorcery. Please feel free to submit a patch that
> would ask you this question about headers, to the linux spell maintainer.
>
> Sergey.
>
> Mark Andrews wrote:
>
> >Hi Ladislav,
> >
> >Thursday, December 12, 2002, 4:11:12 PM, you wrote:
> >
> >LH> If it is known problem, why the UPDATED field is not updated to ensure
> >all glibc will be rebuild ?
> >LH> Or does not this problem relate to all us ?
> >
> >I might be wrong, but it looks like one of the symptoms of having
> >kernel headers later than the version used to compile glibc, hence why
> >a glibc rebuild fixes it. If this is the case, it depends what has
> >been done with kernels as to whether you get the problem or not.
> >
> >I ended up with something similar when I installed a 2.5.x kernel for
> >a looksee and then went back to using 2.4.x - everything after that
> >point got compiled against 2.5.x headers and gave problems..
> >
> >It's one of the reasons why I'd like to see full dependancies and
> >version tracking.. Are you really sure you want to upgrade your kernel
> >headers because you're gonna have to rebuild most of your system!? type
> >stuff...
> >
> >I didn't and just relinked a set 2.4.x kernel headers to
> >/usr/src/linux and the problems went away..
> >
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> SM-Discuss mailing list
> SM-Discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-discuss
>
--
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.
-----------------
PGP public key at
http://wwwkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x3327A9A5
F1
-
[SM-Discuss] Re[2]: [SM-Grimoire]Problems compiling gcc-3.2.1,
Mark Andrews, 12/12/2002
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Re[2]: [SM-Grimoire]Problems compiling gcc-3.2.1,
Sergey A. Lipnevich, 12/12/2002
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Re[2]: [SM-Grimoire]Problems compiling gcc-3.2.1, Dufflebunk, 12/12/2002
-
Re[2]: [SM-Discuss] Re[2]: [SM-Grimoire]Problems compiling gcc-3.2.1,
Mark Andrews, 12/16/2002
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Re[2]: [SM-Grimoire]Problems compiling gcc-3.2.1,
Sergey A Lipnevich, 12/16/2002
- [SM-Discuss] Here we go again...., Mark Andrews, 12/17/2002
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Re[2]: [SM-Grimoire]Problems compiling gcc-3.2.1,
Sergey A Lipnevich, 12/16/2002
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Re[2]: [SM-Grimoire]Problems compiling gcc-3.2.1,
Sergey A. Lipnevich, 12/12/2002
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.