My logs are from Wed Aug 21.
Em 01-10-2013 01:52, Bruce Dubbs escreveu:
> Ken Moffat wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 01, 2013 at 04:41:28PM +1300, Craig Magee wrote:
>>> On 1 October 2013 16:09, Ken Moffat <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, Oct 01, 2013 at 03:27:22PM +1300, Craig Magee wrote:
>>>>> However, grep 'SEARCH.*/usr/lib' dummy.log |sed 's|; |\n|g' returns only:
>>>>> SEARCH_DIR("/usr/lib")
>>>>> SEARCH_DIR("/lib");
I have this in 6.10. Adjusting the Toolchain (073-adjusting):
SEARCH_DIR("/usr/lib")
SEARCH_DIR("/lib");
>>>>>
>>>>> while the book tells me to expect:
>>>>> SEARCH_DIR("/usr/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/lib64")
>>>>> SEARCH_DIR("/usr/local/lib64")
>>>>> SEARCH_DIR("/lib64")
>>>>> SEARCH_DIR("/usr/lib64")
>>>>> SEARCH_DIR("/usr/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/lib")
>>>>> SEARCH_DIR("/usr/local/lib")
>>>>> SEARCH_DIR("/lib")
>>>>> SEARCH_DIR("/usr/lib");
>>>>>
>>>>> Any advice on where I went wrong would be greatly appreciated.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>
>>>> Does the book tell you to expect that ? My local copy of 7.4 says
>>>> that your results are correct. I think you might have been looking
>>>> at a different version of the book, or a different page, along the
>>>> way. In particular, that grep for '.*/usr/lib' cannot possibly match
>>>> '/usr/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/lib'.
>
> It can match if there is more than one SEARCH entry on the line. See below.
>
>>> Ah, I didn't think to take the time decoding the regular expression as they
>>> confuse the heck out of me. I copypasta'd it.
>>>
>>> http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/stable/chapter06/gcc.html
>>> It definitely states the block of text I quoted.
>>>
>>> Would the expected output listed for i686 systems also be incorrect?
>>> SEARCH_DIR("/usr/i686-pc-linux-gnu/lib")
>>> SEARCH_DIR("/usr/local/lib")
>>> SEARCH_DIR("/lib")
>>> SEARCH_DIR("/usr/lib");
I have the same in 6.17. GCC-4.8.1 (080-gcc):
SEARCH_DIR("/usr/i686-pc-linux-gnu/lib")
SEARCH_DIR("/usr/local/lib")
SEARCH_DIR("/lib")
SEARCH_DIR("/usr/lib");
>
>> Ah, I was looking at 6.10 (Adjusting the toolchain), not 6.17.
>>
>> Interesting. In my logs I keep the actual output from dummy.log
>> and that does have all of those. But I don't see how that (same)
>> regexp can possibly return the first two results that we show.
>>
>> OTOH, I'm hours past my bedtime, maybe I'm missing something
>> obvious. I'll defer to Matt or Bruce if they comment in the next
>> few hours. At the moment it looks like such an obvious fubar that I
>> would expect _someone_ to have noticed it, so I guess I'm probably
>> out on my own again and leading you astray ;-)
>
> My log (Sep 23 svn) has exactly what the book says for x86_64. Take a
> look at the full dummy.log to see if there is something that doesn't
> look right.
>
> Note that the sed only separates the SEARCH entries to separate lines.
> That is, changes the semicolon-space pair to a new line.
>
> I haven't done a 686 in quite some time. Perhaps Fernando has.
I think Craig was referring to 6.10, but reading 6.17?
--
[]s,
Fernando
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
