On 05/03/2016 21:31, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Ken Moffat wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 04, 2016 at 09:46:40PM -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>>> Ken Moffat wrote:
>>>>
>>>> This time, I took a look at the Makefiles (in build/), but AFAICS
>>>> only the toplevel Makefile defines install-libs, as
>>>> install-libs-recursive, and I cannot find any other references to
>>>> install-libs and therefore no explicit rule for the recursive
>>>> variant - I guess that -recursive perhaps tells make to run
>>>> install-libs in all the directories, but I cannot see any
>>>> instructions for that in any of them, so I'm no wiser about what
>>>> command is segfaulting.  I'm obviously missing something.  Anybody,
>>>> please ?
>>>
>>> Have I sent you my mount-virt.sh, umount-virt.sh, and clean-mnt-lfs.sh
>>> scripts?  Are you using jhalfs or your own scripts?
>>>
>> I don't have them, and I'm using my own scripts whichs seem to work
>> well from LFS hosts¹
>>
>> At the moment I'm backing up one of my rc2 systems after rebuilding
>> the victims of openssl-1.0.2g, and I've just run
>> make --debug=iv DESTDIR=/scratch/ken/E2FSPROGS2 install-libs 2>&1 |
>> tee libslog
>>
>> I am amazed at the amount of output, but after about 2000 lines the
>> first part of the install seems to happen:
>>
>>         No implicit rule found for '../../../lib/et/com_right.c'.
>>     File 'installdirs-elf-lib' does not exist.
>>    Target 'installdirs-elf-lib' is double-colon and has no
>> prerequisites.
>>    Must remake target 'installdirs-elf-lib'.
>> make[1]: Entering directory
>> '/scratch/ken/e2fsprogs-1.42.12/build/lib/et'
>>          MKINSTALLDIRS /lib /usr/lib
>> mkdir /scratch/ken/E2FSPROGS2
>> mkdir /scratch/ken/E2FSPROGS2/lib
>> mkdir /scratch/ken/E2FSPROGS2/usr
>> mkdir /scratch/ken/E2FSPROGS2/usr/lib
>>    Successfully remade target file 'installdirs-elf-lib'.
>>       Looking for an implicit rule for
>> '../../../util/install-symlink.in'.
>>
>>   Of course, /lib and /usr/lib already existed in chroot.
>>
>>   and then about 400 lines later
>>
>>       No implicit rule found for '../../../util/install-symlink.in'.
>> Must remake target 'install'.
>>          INSTALL-ELF-LIB /lib/libcom_err.so.2.1
>>          SYMLINK /lib/libcom_err.so.2
>>          SYMLINK /usr/lib/libcom_err.so
>>          LDCONFIG
>> Successfully remade target file 'install'.
>>   File 'install' does not exist.
>>       Looking for an implicit rule for
>> '../../../lib/et/compile_et.sh.in'.
>>
>> etc
>>
>> Unfortunately, it looks like that part DID happen in the chroot.
>>
>> AFAICS, the next hunk of activity is
>>
>>    Must remake target 'installdirs'.
>>          MKINSTALLDIRS /usr/lib /usr/include/et /usr/share/et /bin
>> /usr/share/man/man1 /usr/share/man/man3
>> mkdir /scratch/ken/E2FSPROGS2/usr/include
>> mkdir /scratch/ken/E2FSPROGS2/usr/include/et
>> mkdir /scratch/ken/E2FSPROGS2/usr/share
>> mkdir /scratch/ken/E2FSPROGS2/usr/share/et
>> mkdir /scratch/ken/E2FSPROGS2/bin
>> mkdir /scratch/ken/E2FSPROGS2/usr/share/man
>> mkdir /scratch/ken/E2FSPROGS2/usr/share/man/man1
>> mkdir /scratch/ken/E2FSPROGS2/usr/share/man/man3
>> mkdir /scratch/ken/E2FSPROGS2/usr/lib/pkgconfig
>>    Successfully remade target file 'installdirs'.
>>
>> Of those directories, all except /usr/include/et and /usr/share/et
>> should have already existed in chroot.
>> And those two /et directories did NOT get created.
>>
>> [1.] Full disclosure - my logging fixes for grep-2.23 did not do the
>> whole job, because I failed to notice that both callers piped the
>> output through grep.  My latest changes seem correct in completed
>> systems, and in chroot for as far as I got, but I'm again getting
>> some ls errors on screen in my intochroot scripts for passwd and
>> groups although the final logs look acceptable.
>>
>> In chroot (I've mounted it at /mnt/lfs from an LFS system to take a
>> look at the evidence) -
>>
>> MKINSTALLDIRS = $(top_builddir)/../config/mkinstalldirs
>> which matches the build I am using for DESTDIR.
>>
>> And config/mkinstalldirs is just a script from 1993-9, and it invokes
>> mkdir.
>>
>> For the moment, I am none the wiser - that definitely sounds like
>> the sort of thing which selinux might have stopped, but I disabled
>> selinux and rebooted for the second attempt.
> 
> It would be interesting if you could try a jhalfs build to see it that also
> has a problem at the same place.
> 
> I could get a Fedora iso and try it in a gemu session.  Do you want me to do
> that?
> 
>   -- Bruce
> 
> 
> 
I have a VM with Fedora 21. Is it expected to give the same issue?

If so, I can test build with jhalfs.

Pierre
-- 
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Reply via email to