sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List
List archive
- From: David Kowis <dkowis AT shlrm.org>
- To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] x86-64 arch specfile not x86-64
- Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 21:05:37 -0500
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
David Michael Leo Brown Jr. wrote:
|>I have a pure 64-bit system without multilib too. I also made a full
sorcery
|>rebuild, which was successful with devel grimoire. All fixes are
submitted to
|>their respective spells. I will be integrating them into test soon.
|
|
| I have several additions to spells that need them, ie nvidia_driver,
jdk1.5-bin
| do you have those done yet?
I've done jdk1.5-amd64-bin it's in a little grimoire I threw together
http://shlrm.org/x86_64.tar.bz2
|
| My install process was a little different... I installed the iso then
booted to
| it, however, when I started to compile stuff bash failed and I had to use
| bash.static to compile the dependancies of bash then compile bash manually
| to then get bash installed properly, then basesystem compiled fine, I
recompiled
| everything in basesystem about 3 times before I was satisfied that it was
| working. So I still have separate lib and lib64 dirs. I still added
| --disable-multilib to glibc gcc g++ and gcc-cvs ;)
|
I cannot get glibc or gcc to build perhaps I need to add the
- --disable-multilib. Although, it looks more like assembler errors on
mine. :(
| I didn't have that and X compiled fine I don't know if it's because of
the lib
| links thing or what... and it starts fine too, I'm using xfce4.2 right
now.
I could not get anything other than xorg to build, I've tried fluxbox,
kde, and xfce.
|>There are several spells that misbehave on 64-bit system. Some has bad
assembler
|>inside, some don't recognize the archspecs, etc. Some are easily fixable,
|>others... I have no idea.
My glibc, gcc and g++ all appear to have some sort of assembler errors.
I don't understand it at all.
|
| But that's the report from Dave's House on the x86-64 progress ;)
Another report from another Dave :)
- -David Kowis
- --
One login to rule them all, one login to find them. One login to bring
them all, and in the web bind them.
http://shlrm.org
http://www.zoominfo.com/DavidKowis
http://www.flickr.com/photos/davidkowis
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFCU0PxtgErhgxHMHsRAg1HAJ4h21LjKPAuHNHtZS8URg5Lnba+ZACfb0HO
ZpbOp7RgH7rzgMx2lsJ7Bd8=
=xnI4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] x86-64 arch specfile not x86-64
, (continued)
- Re: [SM-Discuss] x86-64 arch specfile not x86-64, Eric Sandall, 04/05/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] x86-64 arch specfile not x86-64, Benoit PAPILLAULT, 04/05/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] x86-64 arch specfile not x86-64,
David Michael Leo Brown Jr., 04/05/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] x86-64 arch specfile not x86-64,
Benoit PAPILLAULT, 04/05/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] x86-64 arch specfile not x86-64,
sergey, 04/05/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] x86-64 arch specfile not x86-64,
Benoit PAPILLAULT, 04/06/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] x86-64 arch specfile not x86-64,
sergey, 04/06/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] x86-64 arch specfile not x86-64,
Benoit PAPILLAULT, 04/06/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] x86-64 arch specfile not x86-64, sergey, 04/06/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] x86-64 arch specfile not x86-64,
Benoit PAPILLAULT, 04/06/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] x86-64 arch specfile not x86-64,
sergey, 04/06/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] x86-64 arch specfile not x86-64,
Benoit PAPILLAULT, 04/06/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] x86-64 arch specfile not x86-64,
sergey, 04/05/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] x86-64 arch specfile not x86-64,
Benoit PAPILLAULT, 04/05/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] x86-64 arch specfile not x86-64,
David Michael Leo Brown Jr., 04/05/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] x86-64 arch specfile not x86-64,
David Kowis, 04/05/2005
- Re: [SM-Discuss] x86-64 arch specfile not x86-64, sergey, 04/06/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] x86-64 arch specfile not x86-64,
sergey, 04/06/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] x86-64 arch specfile not x86-64,
Eric Sandall, 04/06/2005
-
Updated X.org in devel; was: [SM-Discuss] x86-64 arch specfile not x86-64,
sergey, 04/06/2005
- Re: Updated X.org in devel; was: [SM-Discuss] x86-64 arch specfile not x86-64, Flavien Bridault, 04/06/2005
-
Re: Updated X.org in devel; was: [SM-Discuss] x86-64 arch specfile not x86-64,
Flavien Bridault, 04/06/2005
-
Re: Updated X.org in devel; was: [SM-Discuss] x86-64 arch specfile not x86-64,
Flavien Bridault, 04/06/2005
- Re: Updated X.org in devel; was: [SM-Discuss] x86-64 arch specfile not x86-64, Sergey A. Lipnevich, 04/06/2005
- Re: Updated X.org in devel; was: [SM-Discuss] x86-64 arch specfile not x86-64, Eric Sandall, 04/06/2005
- Re: Updated X.org in devel; was: [SM-Discuss] x86-64 arch specfile not x86-64, Sergey A. Lipnevich, 04/06/2005
-
Re: Updated X.org in devel; was: [SM-Discuss] x86-64 arch specfile not x86-64,
Flavien Bridault, 04/06/2005
-
Updated X.org in devel; was: [SM-Discuss] x86-64 arch specfile not x86-64,
sergey, 04/06/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] x86-64 arch specfile not x86-64,
Eric Sandall, 04/06/2005
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] x86-64 arch specfile not x86-64,
David Kowis, 04/05/2005
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.