[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Problem building dev_etrax R2.0.0



> From: johana@xxxxxxx.com
> Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2001 22:22:52 +0200

> My _guess_ is that you didn't download and un-tar'ed glibc and linux-headers
> before running
> the install script? Check the README for details.

My guess too.

> The binary RPM might work for you so you don't have to go through another
> 3.5 h wait:-)

My advise too...

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <fmoli@xxxxxxx.it>
> To: <dev-etrax@xxxxxxx.com>
> Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2001 7:16 PM
> Subject: Problem building dev_etrax R2.0.0
> 
> 
> > I downloaded and installed cris-dist-1.13.tar.gz. It took a lot of time on
> my pIII 600, 256 Megs (3,5 hours!

Dear anyone.  Hardware is most often cheap, human labour is most
often not.

Still, the .i386.rpm is cheaper.

> > I answered yes to all questions, so it whiped out old directories, and
> biuld all from scratch.
> > But it went OK, and the tests too.
> >
> > I put /usr/local/cris in may PATH, as suggested by the script
> >
> >
> > Then I downloaded and unpacked dev_board R2.0.0, and linux 2.4.5.
> >
> > When I run ./install, the script sais that gcc-cris is too old, and I have
> tu use at least tools version 1.13 (!)
> >
> > /usr/local/cris/gcc-cris -dumpversion reports 2.96, the same version
> reported when I run install-cris-tools
> >
> > It seems related with the test with -print-file-name=ld.so.1
> > In fact I have in the cris 2.96 libs a file called ld .... but it is a
> script test.

You're too smart; don't be.  The file reached by the name
"ld.so.1" is another file; it's not the script posing as the
linker, "ld".  They're very distantly related.

> No trace of ld.so.1

Because glibc wasn't built, I presume?

> > I tried to remove the test.... and it builds tools and the kernel!

No, you're too smart.  The kernel and tools do not use glibc.

> > Where's the bug?

Nothing works?	  Answer: you're too smart.
Everything works? Answer: you're smart enough.  Nothing's broke.

If you get to the point where your board boots up just right and
you can log in, you're fine.  Happy, happy.

If you don't, please consider if you really built glibc.  If you
think you did, send me a transcript of your moves and actions.
If the cris-dist installation fails, it tells you where to send
what to report.  If "/usr/local/cris/gcc-cris -mlinux
-print-file-name=ld.so.1" comes back with just "ld.so.1" (no
explicit path that includes a "/"), then I believe you forgot to
unpack
<URL:ftp://ftp.axis.se/pub/axis/tools/cris/compiler-kit/cris-dist-elinux-headers-1.13.tar.gz>
<URL:ftp://ftp.axis.se/pub/axis/tools/cris/compiler-kit/cris-dist-linux-headers-1.13.tar.gz>
<URL:ftp://ftp.axis.se/pub/axis/tools/cris/compiler-kit/cris-dist-glibc-1.13.tar.gz>
in cris-dist-1.13 before you ran ./install-cris-tools.  Then you'll
not have a complete installation; it will not include glibc.
(I'll make sure to accentuate that in some later release.)

Still, the .i386.rpm is strongly recommended.  Nothing's amiss
with that one.  Use it if your system can install it.

brgds, H-P