sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List
List archive
- From: George Sherwood <pilot AT beernabeer.com>
- To: seth AT swoolley.homeip.net
- Cc: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] glibc 2.4 build failure
- Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2006 22:18:56 +0400
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, 25 Nov 2006 08:44:09 -0800
seth AT swoolley.homeip.net wrote:
> If you read the past email discussions on multilib you'll see why they
> aren't all in if statements. Portions were made optional and some
> were made required based on discussion.
>
> I'd like to see a diff -Nua between the old and new configure scripts
> if you can, so I can see why that sed script causes errors for you.
>
> Seth
Here is the diff, but from looking at it, it isn't the change that is
causing the problem, it is the fact that the change itself is causing
configure to be run in that directory. That is what is failing in the
glibc build. At least that is my guess from spending a few hours
trying to get glibc 2.4 installed.
- --- configure.withsedit 2006-11-25 22:08:50.000000000 +0400
+++ configure.withoutsedit 2006-11-25 22:12:06.000000000 +0400
@@ -229,7 +229,7 @@
# and libc_cv_localedir.
test -n "$libc_cv_slibdir" || \
case $machine in
- - sparc/sparc64 | powerpc/powerpc64 | s390/s390-64)
+ sparc/sparc64 | x86_64 | powerpc/powerpc64 | s390/s390-64)
libc_cv_slibdir="/lib64"
if test "$libdir" = '${exec_prefix}/lib'; then
libdir='${exec_prefix}/lib64';
Since I don't have a 64 bit machine, I didn't pay much attention to the
multilib discussions. I am sure there were great reasons for doing it
that way, I was just passing along that it was causing problems for me
and one other user not on a 64 bit machine.
George
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFFaIkTkVJnfkgKg60RAvctAJ922SxZAieVsq+5e324xggmEiK8sgCfSX7n
Mf2AvVMD2KLIzXsr8M+v9MA=
=cFK0
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-
[SM-Discuss] glibc 2.4 build failure,
George Sherwood, 11/25/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] glibc 2.4 build failure,
seth, 11/25/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] glibc 2.4 build failure,
George Sherwood, 11/25/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] glibc 2.4 build failure,
seth, 11/25/2006
- Re: [SM-Discuss] glibc 2.4 build failure, George Sherwood, 11/26/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] glibc 2.4 build failure,
seth, 11/25/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] glibc 2.4 build failure,
George Sherwood, 11/25/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] glibc 2.4 build failure,
seth, 11/25/2006
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.