While building some RPM's from different spec files I get the above warning
Binaries arch (1) not matching the package arch (2).
The code and everything was given to me and I am very new to RPM's. I tried on the internet but didn't find anything close to it. Can someone give me a hint or explain what that warning mean.
I don't get all the details from your question, but probably something like this is happening:
you got some 32bit binaries / libraries
you package those on a 64bit system
the produced rpm is thus (automatically) a some_name.x86_64.rpm
now rpmbuild complains, because the produced rpm is a rpm for 64bit architecture, while the binaries contained inside are for 32bit systems.
The solution is to make sure that the produced rpm specifies the correct architecture needed:
BuildArch: i586
or something like that.
Note that you might get similar errors when packaging both 32bit and 64bit binaries in the same packages. The clean solution would then be to produce separate rpm packages for each architecture.
Related
If you have an answer for this, or further information, I'd welcome it. I'm following advice from here, to offer some unsolicited help by posting this question then an answer I've already found for it.
I have a bare-metal ARM board for which I'm building a cross-toolchain, from sources for GNU binutils, gcc and gdb, and for SourceWare's Newlib. I got those four working and cross-built a DoNothing.c into an ELF file - but I couldn't disassemble it with this:
$ arm-none-eabi-objdump -S DoNothing.elf
The error was:
$ arm-none-eabi-objdump: error while loading shared libraries: libdebuginfod.so.1: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
I'll follow up with a solution.
The error was correct - my system didn't have libdebuginfod.so.1 installed - but I have another cross-binutils, installed from binary for a different target, and its objdump -S works fine on the same host. Why would one build of objdump complain about missing that shared library, when clearly not all builds of objdump need it?
First I tried rebuilding cross binutils, specifying --without-debuginfod as a configure option. No change, which seems odd: surely that should build tools that not only don't use debuginfod but which don't depend on it in any way. (If someone can answer that, or point out what I've misunderstood, it may help people.)
Next I figured debuginfod was inescapable (for my cross-tools built from source at least), so I'd install it to get rid of the error. It's a component of the elfutils package, but installing the latest elfutils available for my Ubuntu 20.04 system didn't bring libdebuginfod.so.1 with it.
I found a later one, for Arch Linux, whose package contents suggested it would - but its package format doesn't match Ubuntu's and installing it was going to involve a lot of work. Instead I opted to build it from the Arch Linux source package. However, running ./configure on that gave a couple of infuriatingly similar errors:
configure: checking libdebuginfod dependencies, --disable-libdebuginfod or --enable-libdebuginfo=dummy to skip
...
configure: error: dependencies not found, use --disable-libdebuginfod to disable or --enable-libdebuginfod=dummy to build a (bootstrap) dummy library.
No combination of those suggestions would allow configure for elfutils-0.182 to run to completion.
The problem of course was my own lack of understanding. The solution came from the Linux From Scratch project: what worked was to issue configure with both of the suggested options, like this:
$ ./configure --prefix=/usr \
--disable-debuginfod \
--enable-libdebuginfod=dummy \
--libdir=/lib
That gave a clean configure; make worked first time, as did make check and then sudo make install which of course installed libdebuginfod.so.1 as required. I then had an arm-none-eabi-objdump which disassembles cross-compiled ELF files without complaining.
I found a package on github (https://github.com/okbob/ncurses-st-menu) and am having trouble compile it for BSD platforms like NetBSD or OpenBSD. The instructions say to do ./autogen.sh, ./configure, and then make. So I install the autoconf, autotools, libtool, gettext, and any other necessary packages and run ./autogen.sh. It works without spitting out any errors. But ./configure says it doesn't support "OS x86_64-unknown-netbsd9.0" if for example on NetBSD. Can someone else try to compile this program? Because if this was done by autotools, it certainly should support any of the four major BSD operating systems.
I created a port for FreeBSD here, maybe it will help you get it running on NetBSD. The most important part is the removal of the AC_MSG_ERROR(["OS $host_os is not supported"]) line from tools/ax_pdcurses.m4, then touching config.make, calling autogen.sh to re-generate the configure script. It's also important to set CFLAGS properly and have the appropriate dependencies installed. Also, I used gmake rather than patch the Makefile since I didn't feel motivated to fix it completely.
I don't know the autogen/config tools,
but if you look the configure file:
https://github.com/okbob/ncurses-st-menu/blob/master/configure
lines 4245-4269 only checks for linux,cygwin,mingw.
For other OS gives the error: OS $host_os is not supported
I'm trying to install gcc4.9 on a SUSE system without an internet connection. I compiled gcc on an Ubuntu machine and installed it into a prefix, then copied the prefix folder to the SUSE machine. When I tried to run it gcc complained about not finding GLIBC_2_14, so I downloaded an rpm for libc6 online and included it into the prefix folders. my LD_LIBRARY_PATH includes prefix/lib and prefix/lib64. When I try to run any program now (ls, cp, cat, etc) I get the error error while loading shared libraries: /home/***/prefix/lib64/libc.so.6: unexpected reloc type 0x25.
Is there any way I can fix this so that I can get gcc4.9 up and running on this system?
As an alternative, is it possible to build gcc staticaly so that I don't have to worry about linking at all when I transfer it between computers?
my LD_LIBRARY_PATH includes prefix/lib and prefix/lib64
See this answer for explanation of why this can't work.
Is there any way I can fix this so that I can get gcc4.9 up and running on this system?
Your best bet is to install whatever GCC package comes with the SuSE system, then use that GCC to configure and install gcc-4.9 on it.
If for some reason you can't do that, this answer has some of the ways in which you can build gcc-4.9 on a newer system and have it still work on an older one.
is it possible to build gcc staticaly so that I don't have to worry about linking at all when I transfer it between computers?
Contrary to popular belief, fully-static binaries are generally less portable then dynamic ones on Linux.
When trying to compile glibc on ubuntu 10.10, x86_64, i get the error:
../misc/syslog.c: In function ‘__vsyslog_chk’:
../misc/syslog.c:123: sorry, unimplemented: inlining failed in call to ‘syslog’: function body not available
../misc/syslog.c:155: sorry, unimplemented: called from here
make[2]: *** [/home/daniel/src/b.c/misc/syslog.o] Error 1
Try this wiki about glibc build issues.
I just ran into the same issue but with 32-bit. When running the configure script, adding CFLAGS='-U_FORTIFY_SOURCE -O2' to the command line seems to work. You may need to add -mtune=i686 and -march=i686 in there too. But maybe not for 64 bit. The i686 seems to be another bug.
Whenever you want to rebuild something on Ubuntu that Debian already, you are almost always best of by starting with the original source package on Debian.
In this particular case you can start with this version from the Debian experimental branch. By using the source package, you ensure you have required build-dependencies and should minimize surprises.
Also, building in a chroot environment is a good way to do this and made easy by packages such as pbuilder and sbuild.
Edit: There are build logs but they don't contain one for amd64, presumably because the maintainers built on that locally. But you can look at i386, say, and see that it passed the error you had.
Cheers,
I want to avoid problems with compiling my code on amd64, yet I don't have a 64-bit CPU available and have no hopes of getting upgrade to my machine any time soon. I have no dreams of testing the code (although that should theoretically be possible using qemu-system) but I'd like to at least compile the code using gcc -m64.
Basic idea works:
CFLAGS=-m64 CXXFLAGS=-m64 ./configure --host x86_64-debian-linux
However, the code depends on some libraries which I typically install from Debian packages, such as libsdl1.2-dev, libgmp3-dev and such. Obviously, getting 64-bit versions of packages installed alongside of 32-bit versions is not a one-liner.
What would be your practices for installing the 64-bit packages? Where would you put them, how would you get them there and how would you use them?
To repeat, I don't have 64-bit CPU and cannot afford getting a new machine.
I have already set up amd64-libs-dev to give some basic push to gcc's -m64.
Attempted so far:
Setting up a 64-bit chroot jail with debootstrap in order to simplify installation of 64-bit development packages for libraries. Failed since finishing the setup (and installing anything afterwards!) requires 64-bit CPU.
Installing gcc-multilib and g++-multilib. This appears to do nothing beside depending on libc6-dev-amd64 which I already installed through amd64-libs-dev.
If you're using debian, before you can use gcc -m64, you need to install gcc-multilib and g++-multilib. This will also install all files needed to link and create a 64bit binary.
You don't have to have a 64bit capable CPU for this either.
Then you can call GCC as follows:
$ gcc -m64 source.c -o source
As for external libraries, debian takes care of that if you have multilib installed. I have a 32bit machine that compiles 64bit code for another machine and links a handful of libraries (libpng, libz for example). Works great and the executable run (debian to debian).
You want to look into the dchroot package to set up a simple chroot(8) environment -- that way you can compile real amd64 binaries in a real 64-bit setting with proper libraries and dependencies. This surely works the other way (i.e. I am using i386 chroots on amd64 hosts) but I don't see why it shouldn't work the other way if your cpu supports amd64.
Edit: Now that you stress that you do not have a amd64-capable cpu, it gets a little trickier. "In theory" you could just rebuild gcc from source as a cross-compiler. In practice, that may be too much work. Maybe you can just get another headless box for a few dollars and install amd64 on that?
check out this fine article that describes how to easily create a 32bit chroot, where you can install all the 32bit tools (gcc and libs)
Doesn't Debian distinguish between lib32 and lib64 directories? In that case, you can just grab the packages and force them to install, regardless of architecture.
If that does not work (or would hose your system!) I would set up a chroot environment and apt-get the 64-bit libraries into there.
Check out pbuilder, It can create build environments for many architectures, some instructions here
Try cross compiling SDL, gmp and other libraries yourself. Or manually extract the files you need from the Debain packages.