Hi Andy and All, As discussed in below mail, I have now installed latest linux distribution in my Host computer to have newer kernel. The installed linux version details are as follows:
#cat /proc/version Linux version 2.6.35.6-45.fc14.i686 (mockbu...@x86-16.phx2.fedoraproject.org) (gcc version 4.5.1 20100924 (Red Hat 4.5.1-4) (GCC) ) #1 SMP Mon Oct 18 23:56:17 UTC 2010 # uname -a Linux cag73 2.6.35.6-45.fc14.i686 #1 SMP Mon Oct 18 23:56:17 UTC 2010 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux # uname -r 2.6.35.6-45.fc14.i686 in the glibc configuration (--enable-kernel) option do I need to give --enable-kernel=2.6.35 or --enable-kernel=$(uname -r) ? kindly advice. Thanks, Emerson On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 9:59 AM, Emerson Yesupatham <yemerson1...@gmail.com>wrote: > Hi Andy, > > Thanks for your feedback. Yes, my kernel is older than 2.6.25. Thanks for > pin-pointing the exact problem. I overlooked Glibc configuration > (--enable-kernel). I will try your suggestions and get back to you > aftersome time. > Hi Elly, > Thanks for your suggestions too. > > Regards, > Emerson > > > On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 11:30 AM, < > lfs-support-requ...@linuxfromscratch.org> wrote: > >> Send lfs-support mailing list submissions to >> lfs-support@linuxfromscratch.org >> >> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit >> http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support >> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to >> lfs-support-requ...@linuxfromscratch.org >> >> You can reach the person managing the list at >> lfs-support-ow...@linuxfromscratch.org >> >> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >> than "Re: Contents of lfs-support digest..." >> >> >> Today's Topics: >> >> 1. LFS-BOOK-7.0 Section 5.9 binutils pass2 doubt >> (Emerson Yesupatham) >> 2. Re: LFS-BOOK-7.0 Section 5.9 binutils pass2 doubt (Eleanore Boyd) >> 3. Re: LFS-BOOK-7.0 Section 5.9 binutils pass2 doubt (Andrew Benton) >> 4. Re: /etc/fstab (Alexander Kapshuk) >> 5. Re: /etc/fstab (Ken Moffat) >> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Message: 1 >> Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2012 22:39:02 +0530 >> From: Emerson Yesupatham <yemerson1...@gmail.com> >> Subject: [lfs-support] LFS-BOOK-7.0 Section 5.9 binutils pass2 doubt >> To: lfs-support@linuxfromscratch.org >> Message-ID: >> < >> caocfg3sk4m9t2lz1gqrahogxbb9ad5mdkshrjeuxipp-6qv...@mail.gmail.com> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" >> >> >> Hi, >> >> I am trying to build LFS. I am following LFS-BOOK-7.0.pdf. >> >> Problem: >> I am facing the following error while compiling Binutils-2.21.1a - Pass 2, >> section 5.9. >> " *configure: error: cannot run C compiled programs.*" Complete error is >> >> attached in config.log file. >> >> The command executed was: >> CC="$LFS_TGT-gcc -B/tools/lib/" \ >> AR=$LFS_TGT-ar RANLIB=$LFS_TGT-ranlib \ >> ../binutils-2.21.1/configure --prefix=/tools \ >> --disable-nls --with-lib-path=/tools/lib >> >> Other information: >> In my host system, the following important check under "Caution" >> mentioned >> in section 5.8 Adjusting tool chain, is working fine as shown below: >> * * >> >> lfs:/mnt/lfs/sources$ echo 'main(){}' > dummy.c >> lfs:/mnt/lfs/sources$ $LFS_TGT-gcc -B/tools/lib dummy.c >> lfs:/mnt/lfs/sources$ readelf -l a.out | grep ': /tools' >> [Requesting program interpreter: /tools/lib/ld-linux.so.2] >> *My host system violates one of the prerequisites mentioned in page XVi* >> >> *Linux Kernel-2.6.25 * >> >> (having been compiled with GCC-4.1.2 or greater) >> The reason for the kernel version requirement is that we specify that >> version when building glibc in Chapter 6 at >> the recommendation of the developers. It is also required by udev. >> If the host kernel is either earlier than 2.6.25, or it was not compiled >> using a GCC-4.1.2 (or later) compiler, you >> will need to replace the kernel with one adhering to the specifications. >> >> Question: I tried to locate solution for this error in the lfs-support >> archive but could not find the identical one. Could any one help me out on >> this? I am blocked due to this error completely. >> I belive the above prerequisite violation should not create problem at >> this >> point i.e. binutils pass2. >> >> Thanks, >> Emerson >> -------------- next part -------------- >> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >> URL: >> http://linuxfromscratch.org/pipermail/lfs-support/attachments/20120619/4efb355a/attachment-0001.html >> -------------- next part -------------- >> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... >> Name: config.log >> Type: application/octet-stream >> Size: 11575 bytes >> Desc: not available >> Url : >> http://linuxfromscratch.org/pipermail/lfs-support/attachments/20120619/4efb355a/attachment-0001.obj >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 2 >> Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2012 12:39:00 -0500 >> From: Eleanore Boyd <cara...@cox.net> >> Subject: Re: [lfs-support] LFS-BOOK-7.0 Section 5.9 binutils pass2 >> doubt >> To: LFS Support List <lfs-support@linuxfromscratch.org> >> Message-ID: <4fe0b934.2070...@cox.net> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" >> >> >> On 6/19/2012 12:09 PM, Emerson Yesupatham wrote: >> > Hi, >> > I am trying to build LFS. I am following LFS-BOOK-7.0.pdf. >> > Problem: >> > I am facing the following error while compiling Binutils-2.21.1a - >> > Pass 2, section 5.9. >> > " *configure: error: cannot run C compiled programs.*" Complete error >> >> > is attached in config.log file. >> > The command executed was: >> > CC="$LFS_TGT-gcc -B/tools/lib/" \ >> > AR=$LFS_TGT-ar RANLIB=$LFS_TGT-ranlib \ >> > ../binutils-2.21.1/configure --prefix=/tools \ >> > --disable-nls --with-lib-path=/tools/lib >> > Other information: >> > In my host system, the following important check under "Caution" >> > mentioned in section 5.8 Adjusting tool chain, is working fine as >> > shown below: >> > ** >> >> > lfs:/mnt/lfs/sources$ echo 'main(){}' > dummy.c >> > lfs:/mnt/lfs/sources$ $LFS_TGT-gcc -B/tools/lib dummy.c >> > lfs:/mnt/lfs/sources$ readelf -l a.out | grep ': /tools' >> > [Requesting program interpreter: /tools/lib/ld-linux.so.2] >> > *My host system violates one of the prerequisites mentioned in page XVi* >> > *Linux Kernel-2.6.25 * >> >> > (having been compiled with GCC-4.1.2 or greater) >> > The reason for the kernel version requirement is that we specify that >> > version when building glibc in Chapter 6 at >> > the recommendation of the developers. It is also required by udev. >> > If the host kernel is either earlier than 2.6.25, or it was not >> > compiled using a GCC-4.1.2 (or later) compiler, you >> > will need to replace the kernel with one adhering to the specifications. >> > Question: I tried to locate solution for this error in the lfs-support >> > archive but could not find the identical one. Could any one help me >> > out on this? I am blocked due to this error completely. >> > I belive the above prerequisite violation should not create problem at >> > this point i.e. binutils pass2. >> > Thanks, >> > Emerson >> > >> > >> First, use an HTML copy so you can copy+paste easier. Second, run all >> the possible upgrades your distro offers. If your kernel is out-of-date, >> then you must not be updating anything. Or, if it's something similar to >> Slackware or Arch Linux, get the fresh packages and recompile them. Then >> try building from the beginning. You might have better luck then. >> >> Elly >> >> -------------- next part -------------- >> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >> URL: >> http://linuxfromscratch.org/pipermail/lfs-support/attachments/20120619/28c37bec/attachment-0001.html >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 3 >> Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2012 19:23:12 +0100 >> From: Andrew Benton <a...@benton.eu.com> >> Subject: Re: [lfs-support] LFS-BOOK-7.0 Section 5.9 binutils pass2 >> doubt >> To: lfs-support@linuxfromscratch.org >> Message-ID: <20120619192312.2bec625a.a...@benton.eu.com> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII >> >> On Tue, 19 Jun 2012 18:09:21 +0100 >> Emerson Yesupatham <yemerson1...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > *My host system violates one of the prerequisites mentioned in page XVi* >> > >> > *Linux Kernel-2.6.25 * >> >> So what are you saying, that your kernel is older than 2.6.25? >> Glibc is configured with --enable-kernel=2.6.25 so if you try to use it >> (eg, when configuring the next package, Binutils) with an older kernel >> it won't work and you'll get an error message like the one you posted. >> The obvious solution is to get a newer kernel but you could also try >> configuring glibc with --enable-kernel=$(uname -r) but it may not work >> (I can't remember why). >> So upgrade your kernel before you start the book. >> >> Andy >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 4 >> Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2012 21:27:03 +0300 >> From: Alexander Kapshuk <alexander.kaps...@gmail.com> >> Subject: Re: [lfs-support] /etc/fstab >> To: LFS Support List <lfs-support@linuxfromscratch.org> >> Message-ID: <4fe0c477.7070...@gmail.com> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed >> >> I'd appreciate it if somebody could please have a look at my /etc/fstab >> file shown below and let me know if it's OK. I've searched this mailing >> list's archives and an example /etc/fstab I found was a bit different to >> mine. I also had a look at the /etc/fstab files on a Ubuntu and Debian >> systems, but they weren't as detailed as mine. >> >> In particular, I'd like to know whether it is my /boot partition or / >> partition that has to be checked by fsck. Is it OK for /boot to be ext3, >> or should I have made it ext2? Googling it suggests that it's probably >> better for it to be ext2, but ext3 should do fine as well. >> >> :; mount >> ... >> /dev/sda5 on /mnt/lfs/boot type ext3 (rw) >> /dev/sda6 on /mnt/lfs type ext3 (rw,commit=0,commit=0) >> /dev/sda7 on /mnt/lfs/opt type ext3 (rw,commit=0,commit=0) >> /dev/sda8 on /mnt/lfs/usr/src type ext3 (rw,commit=0,commit=0) >> /dev/sda9 on /mnt/lfs/home type ext3 (rw,commit=0,commit=0) >> /dev on /mnt/lfs/dev type none (rw,bind) >> devpts on /mnt/lfs/dev/pts type devpts (rw) >> shm on /run/shm type tmpfs (rw) >> proc on /mnt/lfs/proc type proc (rw) >> sysfs on /mnt/lfs/sys type sysfs (rw) >> >> root@hostname:~# file -s /dev/sda[5-9] | awk '{ print $1,$8 }' >> /dev/sda5: UUID=64b0a82e-4500-49c0-b426-e97562ed0585 >> /dev/sda6: UUID=a2f6cc54-c7d7-41e9-8e00-123da318f743 >> /dev/sda7: UUID=140b05f2-6ca5-4cc8-b45b-52e6e6d2e164 >> /dev/sda8: UUID=a6563b03-a212-47b0-b6cc-7f767768852d >> /dev/sda9: UUID=0901943d-ab94-423a-accb-cd425d3d13c1 >> >> root:/# cat /etc/fstab >> # Begin /etc/fstab >> >> # <file system> <mount point> <type> <options> <dump> <pass> >> UUID=64b0a82e-4500-49c0-b426-e97562ed0585 /boot ext3 defaults 0 2 >> UUID=a2f6cc54-c7d7-41e9-8e00-123da318f743 / ext3 defaults 0 1 >> UUID=140b05f2-6ca5-4cc8-b45b-52e6e6d2e164 /opt ext3 defaults 0 2 >> UUID=a6563b03-a212-47b0-b6cc-7f767768852d /usr/src ext3 defaults 0 2 >> UUID=0901943d-ab94-423a-accb-cd425d3d13c1 /home ext3 defaults 0 2 >> UUID=c0882b91-9df5-43f9-b5e3-d77d68b53a33 none swap sw 0 0 >> proc /proc proc nosuid,noexec,nodev 0 0 >> sysfs /sys sysfs nosuid,noexec,nodev 0 0 >> devpts /dev/pts devpts gid=4,mode=620 0 0 >> tmpfs /run tmpfs defaults 0 0 >> devtmpfs /dev devtmpfs mode=0755,nosuid 0 0 >> >> # End /etc/fstab >> >> Thanks. >> >> Alexander Kapshuk. >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> Message: 5 >> Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2012 21:14:15 +0100 >> From: Ken Moffat <zarniwh...@ntlworld.com> >> Subject: Re: [lfs-support] /etc/fstab >> To: LFS Support List <lfs-support@linuxfromscratch.org> >> Message-ID: <20120619201415.GB14702@milliways> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 >> >> On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 09:27:03PM +0300, Alexander Kapshuk wrote: >> > I'd appreciate it if somebody could please have a look at my /etc/fstab >> > file shown below and let me know if it's OK. I've searched this mailing >> > list's archives and an example /etc/fstab I found was a bit different to >> > mine. I also had a look at the /etc/fstab files on a Ubuntu and Debian >> > systems, but they weren't as detailed as mine. >> > >> > In particular, I'd like to know whether it is my /boot partition or / >> > partition that has to be checked by fsck. Is it OK for /boot to be ext3, >> > or should I have made it ext2? Googling it suggests that it's probably >> > better for it to be ext2, but ext3 should do fine as well. >> > >> ext3 should be ok for /boot. fsck will be run on *all* the >> filesystems in fstab which are automounted and in need of an fsck. >> >> > :; mount >> > ... >> > /dev/sda5 on /mnt/lfs/boot type ext3 (rw) >> > /dev/sda6 on /mnt/lfs type ext3 (rw,commit=0,commit=0) >> > /dev/sda7 on /mnt/lfs/opt type ext3 (rw,commit=0,commit=0) >> > /dev/sda8 on /mnt/lfs/usr/src type ext3 (rw,commit=0,commit=0) >> > /dev/sda9 on /mnt/lfs/home type ext3 (rw,commit=0,commit=0) >> > /dev on /mnt/lfs/dev type none (rw,bind) >> > devpts on /mnt/lfs/dev/pts type devpts (rw) >> > shm on /run/shm type tmpfs (rw) >> > proc on /mnt/lfs/proc type proc (rw) >> > sysfs on /mnt/lfs/sys type sysfs (rw) >> > >> > root@hostname:~# file -s /dev/sda[5-9] | awk '{ print $1,$8 }' >> >> > /dev/sda5: UUID=64b0a82e-4500-49c0-b426-e97562ed0585 >> > /dev/sda6: UUID=a2f6cc54-c7d7-41e9-8e00-123da318f743 >> > /dev/sda7: UUID=140b05f2-6ca5-4cc8-b45b-52e6e6d2e164 >> > /dev/sda8: UUID=a6563b03-a212-47b0-b6cc-7f767768852d >> > /dev/sda9: UUID=0901943d-ab94-423a-accb-cd425d3d13c1 >> > >> Thanks, I didn't know that file could do that! >> > root:/# cat /etc/fstab >> > # Begin /etc/fstab >> > >> > # <file system> <mount point> <type> <options> <dump> <pass> >> > UUID=64b0a82e-4500-49c0-b426-e97562ed0585 /boot ext3 defaults 0 2 >> > UUID=a2f6cc54-c7d7-41e9-8e00-123da318f743 / ext3 defaults 0 1 >> > UUID=140b05f2-6ca5-4cc8-b45b-52e6e6d2e164 /opt ext3 defaults 0 2 >> > UUID=a6563b03-a212-47b0-b6cc-7f767768852d /usr/src ext3 defaults 0 2 >> > UUID=0901943d-ab94-423a-accb-cd425d3d13c1 /home ext3 defaults 0 2 >> > UUID=c0882b91-9df5-43f9-b5e3-d77d68b53a33 none swap sw 0 0 >> >> Why not just use /dev/sda5 /boot ext3 ... and similarly for the >> others ? I suppose that UUID will work once udev is running. For >> the rootfs, the kernel will try to use whatever root= you passed on >> the commandline from grub : here UUID will NOT work (we don't use an >> initrd) - and what is shown in /etc/fstab for '/' is at best >> documentation. >> >> Dump values of '1' are, or at least used to be, conventional for >> ext filesystems, but that probably doesn't make any real difference. >> >> So, I *think* that your fstab will probably work. >> >> I also think that /usr/src and /opt are wastes of filesystems : >> Anything you build in /opt will be linked to the libraries in /lib >> and therefore might break work when you build your next LFS >> because the versions will probably change. At the moment, the only >> thing in /opt on my current system is llvm - >> >> ken@ac4tv ~ $ldd /opt/llvm/lib/libLLVM-3.1.so <http://libllvm-3.1.so/> >> linux-vdso.so.1 (0x00007ffff4fff000) >> libpthread.so.0 => /lib/libpthread.so.0 (0x00007fb9be449000) >> libffi.so.5 => /usr/lib/libffi.so.5 (0x00007fb9be240000) >> libdl.so.2 => /lib/libdl.so.2 (0x00007fb9be03c000) >> libstdc++.so.6 => /usr/lib/libstdc++.so.6 (0x00007fb9bdd3b000) >> libm.so.6 => /lib/libm.so.6 (0x00007fb9bda3f000) >> libgcc_s.so.1 => /usr/lib/libgcc_s.so.1 (0x00007fb9bd82a000) >> libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0x00007fb9bd46d000) >> /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x00007fb9bfbbc000) >> >> libpthread, libdl, libm libc, and even ld-linux are the things >> which might break with a newer glibc. OTOH, those people who update >> glibc in-place can probably handle this. I also believe that if I'm >> going to install a new system, I want the current versions of >> everything - not a version from whenever I installed the current >> system. >> >> The case against /usr/src is different : you can build packages >> anywhere that there is enough space - on recent disks I dedicate a >> large space to /scratch (it doesn't get backed up) and build within >> that. On my previous smaller disks I used to build in /home (ok, >> for scripted installss I have built in /usr/src if there was room, >> and still use /mnt/lfs/usr/src, but it doesn't require a separate >> partition). >> >> Many desktop packages use a lot of space, but there is usually no >> good reason to keep the build director{y,ies} around after a package >> is installed. >> >> Since I'm off on my partitioning hobbyhorse, I'll mention that >> people who intend to keep using LFS will want a second filesystem to >> use as /mnt/lfs for their next build. For many people, '/' from >> their original host system can be used for that. Other approaches >> are possible, but life is hard enough for those of us who build from >> source, no need to gratuitously make things harder for ourselves. >> > proc /proc proc nosuid,noexec,nodev 0 0 >> > sysfs /sys sysfs nosuid,noexec,nodev 0 0 >> > devpts /dev/pts devpts gid=4,mode=620 0 0 >> > tmpfs /run tmpfs defaults 0 0 >> > devtmpfs /dev devtmpfs mode=0755,nosuid 0 0 >> > >> > # End /etc/fstab >> > >> > Thanks. >> > >> > Alexander Kapshuk. >> > >> Your system, your partitioning scheme. >> >> ?en >> -- >> das eine Mal als Trag?die, das andere Mal als Farce >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> -- >> http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support >> FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html >> Unsubscribe: See the above information page >> >> >> End of lfs-support Digest, Vol 2602, Issue 1 >> ******************************************** >> > >
-- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
