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.
Related
I'm using gsrc to compile glibc in order to use multiple versions of it on my machine. I'm using debian and when I tried make -C pkg/gnu/libc install -j8 it just reports this error:
Segmentation fault make: *** [sysinstall-install] Error 1
Does anyone have ideas on what this could be?
I'm using debian and when I tried make -C pkg/gnu/libc install -j8 it just reports this error
You didn't tell how this libc has been configured. In any case, incorrectly installing GLIBC on a system is a very easy way to render your system un-bootable. This is not recommended for novices (and you appear to be a novice).
compile glibc in order to use multiple versions of it on my machine
See this answer on how that can be achieved.
The newest publicly available tcpslice version 1.2a1 (found on its github) has a bug where it expects 8 bytes for a time field but gets 16 (when in 64 bit). This leads to the error:
tcpslice: problems finding end packet of file ./abc1234.bin
I got my info for this error from: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=485670
This led me to grab the updated version (1.2a3) from here and try compiling from source: http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/repo/pkgs/tcpdump/tcpslice-1.2a3.tar.gz/. I think this is or close to the actual patch
HOWEVER, I couldn't ./configure this on my mac because it says (understandably) this:
checking build system type... configure: error: cannot guess build type; you must specify one
Not one to give up, and becuase I don't wnat to switch over to linux to continue deveolping my wrapper script, I tried to compile like this:
./configure --build=i686-pc-linux-gnu
This configured and make'd!!! However, its 32 bit which still gives the same error when I run the newly made tcpdump!!
Is this possible at all, and what other --build type can I use that is for x86_64 bit systems? No other --build types are compiling for me. I have no idea how to find acceptable build types, and am currently referenceing this: https://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-4.2/buildstat.html
EDIT: I tried Warren Young's suggestion here but libtoolize --force did not remake config.guess, so I manually downloaded the "newest" config.guess from the link on this page with curl. However, now ./configure says:
checking build system type... Invalid configuration `x86_64-apple-darwin15.4.0': machine `x86_64-apple' not recognized
configure: error: /bin/sh ./config.sub x86_64-apple-darwin15.4.0 failed
Am I screwed? Or can I sitll try a default x86_64 -build type (which I still cannot find):
checking build system type... Invalid configuration `x86_64': machine `x86_64' not recognized
configure: error: /bin/sh ./config.sub x86_64 failed
Welp, the answer was to manually download the newest config.guess and config.sub files from here: https://www.gnu.org/software/gettext/manual/html_node/config_002eguess.html and to overwrite the ones in the tcpslice directory.
However, the same problem still existed. There must be another reason the time issue is happening on the mac because this version of tcpslice worked fine on ubuntu on the same pcap.
Thanks to Warren Young's post in this question for guiding me in the right (though not successful) direction: Compiling tcpsplice on a 64-bit machine. Guess I'll be using ubuntu to finish my script!
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.
I have installed cmake 2.8.11 and now trying to build llvm with cmake. however I am getting the following build error
Scanning dependencies of target LLVMAArch64Utils
make[2]: *** No rule to make target `lib/Target/AArch64/AArch64GenSubtargetInfo.inc', needed by `lib/Target/AArch64/Utils/CMakeFiles/LLVMAArch64Utils.dir/AArch64BaseInfo.cpp.o'.
Stop.
Does this mean that cmake does not have support for 64-bit architectire? If so, can someone tell me an easy way to add AArch64 patch to cmake 2.8.11.
This seems like a bug in build script.
See this LLVM team bug tracker item.
Tim Northover 2013-07-14 15:57:50 CDT Hi Ray,
I think this has been fixed in r182190, which unfortunately just
missed the 3.3 release itself. I'm now trying to get it into the minor
release we're trying to make.
I'll leave this open, and assigned to me (as a reminder) until that
happens.
Thanks for taking the time to report it, and I'm sorry you had to.
Tim.
So we have this program which is being compiled in OpenSuse 13.1 with the following configuration:
GCC 4.6-15.1.3
GLIBC 2.14
Libcrypto 1.0
However, it's supposed to run with OpenSuse 10.3 which has the following configuration:
GCC 4.2-24
GLIBC 2.6.1-18
Libcrypto 0.9.8
The only dependency I could find so far was the __isoc99_sscanf which is introduced in GLIBC 2.7. I tried to fix this with writing my own sscanf function and replace it by adding the following line in my source code:
__asm__(".symver __isoc99_sscanf1, __isoc99_sscanf##GLIBC_2.7");
Now I'm left with the libcrypto dependency and it also looks like it's segfaulting on a munmap() (when i strace the program) function when I try to run it in the old OpenSuse environment (could be a GCC thing?)
So basically, I don't really know what the standard procedure is for fixing this kind of backwards compatibility issues. Any idea's on this?
Normally you would simply install the older gcc, glibc, and other libraries on the new OS (usually made available as RPMs for this reason) and make sure you compile only with those. It's an uphill battle to try to fix all the backwards incompatibilities yourself.
To be more thorough you could build in a chroot of the older OS, maybe even package it up into an RPM so the dependencies are automatically checked. Something like the Open Build Service makes this very easy.