Hi Benda, [email protected] wrote: > Dear guys and girls, > > I have successfully bootstraped Gentoo Prefix on some old Fedora Core 3 > machine on which I am only a normal user. I am very happy. Gentoo rocks! > Alt rocks! Prefix rocks!
Thank you! > Now I am locking my target on some AIX machines. But the problems come > up in an early stage. > > First after STFW, I found I need to use prefix-launcher on > sf.net. QUESTION: is prefix-launcher an official part of gentoo-prefix? > I can see most recent svn ci's. why is it hosted on sf instead of > gentoo? Well, it is not "official" part of Gentoo Prefix, but it is a de-facto requirement to bootstrap on AIX and HP-UX (maybe others). It _may_ work to bootstrap without prefix-launcher there, but it is a lot harder than on Linux and Solaris fex. The reason it is on sf is that the "prefix"-idea was born before "Gentoo Prefix" as the implementation. > But prefix-launcher fail wildly when it's compiling gcc-4.2.4. This is interesting: I'm using prefix-launcher (checking out from svn, not the release-tarball) on a weekly automated basis... > I was frustrated to do make clean && make install on prefix-launcher > again and again. Finally I realized I have to compile gcc-4.2.4 by > myself. Well, prefix-launcher itself does not support 'make clean', just 'make install' (where 'make' has to be GNU-make). > But there comes the linker problem: > > There are always some unresolved symbol issue in stage 3 of > bootstrap. After another round of STFW, esp. on gcc bugzilla, I think it > is some path issue on AIX linker. ld just couldn't find the right > library to link against. > > Any hints and ideas are appreciated. > > I attach the latest command (cmd) and linking message (debug). I'm going to look why/where these symbols are resolved from here... /haubi/ -- Michael Haubenwallner Gentoo on a different level
