Ken Moffat wrote: > On Wed, Jan 22, 2014 at 12:23:26AM +0000, Ken Moffat wrote: >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 09:53:03PM +0000, Enrique Larraia wrote: >> >> Your error was >>> libtool: install: chmod 644 /tools/lib/libsupc++.a >>> libtool: install: i686-lfs-linux-gnu-ranlib /tools/lib/libsupc++.a >>> ../libtool: line 1132: i686-lfs-linux-gnu-ranlib: command not >>> found >> > > I got sufficiently interested by this to try building LFS-7.4 on my > i686 7.4 system, using copy-and-paste. Fortunately (although > perhaps discouragingly for Enrique) this isn't very far into the > build. > >> That appears to be using a libtool script. I don't recall if it is >> within the gcc-build directory, or the gcc-4.8.1 source - or even in >> a subdirectory. But I guess it is in the top level of gcc-build (if >> I'm wrong you'll need to search for it), and perhaps created from a >> file in the gcc source by using sed on variables. >> > > OK, so I overlooked that we are now only trying to build and > install in libstdc++. The libtool script is gcc-build/libtool. >> What is the first line of this libtool script ? (I'm guessing it >> will be something like #!/bin/sh or #!/bin/bash ? > > Mine starts #! /bin/sh so the /bin/sh symlink to /bin/bash is > indeed important. Let's try rechecking, in case something in > ubuntu-land is making the symlink disappear (unlikely, but when the > obvious fails, never discount things). > > I get > lfs:/mnt/lfs/sources/gcc-build$ file /bin/sh > /bin/sh: symbolic link to `bash' > > lfs:/mnt/lfs/sources/gcc-build$ /bin/sh --version > GNU bash, version 4.2.45(1)-release (i686-pc-linux-gnu) > Copyright (C) 2011 Free Software Foundation, Inc. > License GPLv3+: GNU GPL version 3 or later > <http://gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html> > > This is free software; you are free to change and redistribute it. > There is NO WARRANTY, to the extent permitted by law. > > You are almost certainly using a different version of bash, please > can you compare your results for those two commands ? > > At this point, I'm expecting that the /bin/sh -> bash symlink is > NOT effective - but that is guesswork, and I don't know why it would > happen.
I don't know if it will help or not, but here is the log from my build this morning: http://anduin.linuxfromscratch.org/~bdubbs/036-gcc-libstdc++-4.8.2 -- Bruce > If your /bin/sh is any version of bash-4.2, please try what I've > written below. >> >> Can you paste the lines around line 1132 where it is invoking this >> command ? I'm not sure if the ranlib (i686-lfs-linux-gnu-ranlib) is >> hard-coded in the libtool script [ i.e. something got processed by >> the shell to create this libtool script ], or if it is using >> variables. >> > > In fact, that is a chunk within a function which looks like this: > > # func_show_eval cmd [fail_exp] > # Unless opt_silent is true, then output CMD. Then, if opt_dryrun > # is > # not true, evaluate CMD. If the evaluation of CMD fails, and > # FAIL_EXP > # is given, then evaluate it. > func_show_eval () > { > my_cmd="$1" > my_fail_exp="${2-:}" > > ${opt_silent-false} || { > func_quote_for_expand "$my_cmd" > eval "func_echo $func_quote_for_expand_result" > } > > if ${opt_dry_run-false}; then :; else > eval "$my_cmd" > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ this is line 1132 > my_status=$? > if test "$my_status" -eq 0; then :; else > eval "(exit $my_status); $my_fail_exp" > fi > fi > } > > So we can see that either the function is being misparsed (perhaps > the local variables give a problem), or else the command is simply > not being found. > > In the previous case (x86_64) I think we established that the > ranlib WAS on the PATH, but let's check in your case that things are > correct. Here are my commands and results - > > lfs:/mnt/lfs/sources/gcc-build$ echo $PATH > /tools/bin:/bin:/usr/bin > > lfs:/mnt/lfs/sources/gcc-build$ type -pa i686-lfs-linux-gnu-ranlib > /tools/bin/i686-lfs-linux-gnu-ranlib > > lfs:/mnt/lfs/sources/gcc-build$ ldd $(type -pa > i686-lfs-linux-gnu-ranlib) > linux-gate.so.1 (0xffffe000) > libz.so.1 => /lib/libz.so.1 (0xb7701000) > libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0xb754c000) > /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0xb772d000) > > And if your results really do match all of mine, I think I need a > very stiff drink ;-) > -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
