Adriaan de Groot wrote: > On Monday 21 April 2008 18:12, Michael Schuster wrote: >> Lukas Oboril wrote: >>> On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 1:16 PM, David Finberg <David.Finberg at sun.com> > wrote: >>>> On Fri, 18 Apr 2008, Lukas Oboril wrote: >>>>>> 1) STDCXX doesn't properly deal with the compilers not being in >>>>>> /opt/SUNWspro, it does some header file mucking and moving based off >>>>>> of /opt/SUNWspro/prod/include and screws up for a non-default >>>>>> comiler. Check the Solaris directory for the offender. > > Regarding this original problem, I think we need to be pretty clear: if > you're > not running The Right Environment (and this needs to be documented on > Techbase as well, if not better) consisting of SS12 + patches > in /opt/SUNWspro and a home dir at $(HOME) with a pkgtool directory > ~/packages then right now building is out of the question.
despite all I said, this last (pkgtool directory == ~/packages) is a little unfortunate; within Sun, all (regular) home directories are NFS-mounted, so if you try to do this as "yourself", you'll be exercising NFS quite a bit and thereby limiting BW for others. I'm by no means mandating that this be changed right now; but if we had a wish list, guess what would feature most prominent ... :-) > It's a matter of distributing the available effort from the core team "best" > in some way: chasing variables in installations or getting the core software > to work or pulling in new developers. Exactly my point, thx for clarifying the wording :-) >> Last time I went through a compile cycle of KBE on Sparc (I never manage to >> continue much further before job-life kicks in, but that's a different >> story ...), I had the impression that it worked - I believe the result of >> that compile cycle is still available on bionicmutton ;-) > > Yes, those are still up there now. Last time I kicked my U45 to life it > worked > fine as well. Again, with exactly the default configuration. good to know, thx for the confirmation. >> I'd advocate for a fairly stable (or "known good") release of KBE at a >> point in time that's not too far in the future (like yesterday ;-), and any >> further development in a branch/fork/sandbox, that only gets pushed back >> when a) it shows so much benefit that it outweighs the inconvenience >> or >> b) we have a serious problem with the existing KBE that a simple patch(*) >> cannot address. > > The thing is, KBE *is* "known good" for the people using it every day. It > builds without a hitch for me whenever I try it. It obviously doesn't for > some other people, so what are we to do? Divert effort into getting KBE to > work under all circumstances, or go with the old-fashioned "send patches" > approach and carry on with KCE or KDE? I can tar up my current KBE for amd64 > and stick it on bionicmutton if that could be useful to anyone. Maybe I was operating under a mistaken perceiption here, ie, that KBE *is* changing too much - semi-regular emails (mostly from Luc) seemed to indicate this. I'll gladly accept that I'm wrong here :-) Michael -- Michael Schuster http://blogs.sun.com/recursion Recursion, n.: see 'Recursion'
