On Tue, Mar 03, 2015 at 03:42:05PM +0100, ZyaX wrote: > > Thanks. I found that the pertinent config.log was > gcc-build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/libgcc/config.log. It was the only > one of around ten files that had the sought error message. Inspecting > the part with 'fails sanity check' gives a message above that repeats > around 9 times and consists of: > > configure:3938: /lib/cpp conftest.c > /sources/gcc-4.9.1/libgcc/configure: line 1459: /lib/cpp: No such file > or directory > configure:3938: $? = 127 > configure: failed program was: > | /* confdefs.h */ > | #define PACKAGE_NAME "GNU C Runtime Library" > | #define PACKAGE_TARNAME "libgcc" > | #define PACKAGE_VERSION "1.0" > | #define PACKAGE_STRING "GNU C Runtime Library 1.0" > | #define PACKAGE_BUGREPORT "" > | #define PACKAGE_URL "http://www.gnu.org/software/libgcc/"; > | /* end confdefs.h. */ > | #ifdef __STDC__ > | # include <limits.h> > | #else > | # include <assert.h> > | #endif > | Syntax error > configure:3968: error: in > `/sources/gcc-build/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/libgcc': > configure:3971: error: C preprocessor "/lib/cpp" fails sanity check > > > Though I'm not sure where one message ends and the next begins. But > going up all the way it starts out with configure(i.e. > /sources/gcc-4.9.1/libgcc/configure) checking for the C preprocessor: > > configure:3848: checking how to run the C preprocessor > configure:3879: /sources/gcc-build/./gcc/xgcc > -B/sources/gcc-build/./gcc/ -B/usr/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/bin/ > -B/usr/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/lib/ -isystem > /usr/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/include -isystem > /usr/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/sys-include -E conftest.c > In file included from /usr/include/bits/posix1_lim.h:160:0, > from /usr/include/limits.h:143, > from /sources/gcc-build/gcc/include-fixed/limits.h:168, > from /sources/gcc-build/gcc/include-fixed/syslimits.h:7, > from /sources/gcc-build/gcc/include-fixed/limits.h:34, > from conftest.c:10: > /usr/include/bits/local_lim.h:38:26: fatal error: linux/limits.h: No > such file or directory > #include <linux/limits.h>
I think you are correct that linux/limit.h is the problem. Looking at one of my x86_64 7.6 logs, the linux headers installed /usr/include/linux/limits.h [ as well as a lot of other files there, and directories /usr/include/asm /usr/include/asm-generic /usr/include/drm /usr/include/mtd /usr/include/rdma /usr/include/scsi /usr/include/sound /usr/include/uapi /usr/include/video /usr/include/xen ]. Of course glibc then puts more files into some of those directories. > ^ > compilation terminated. > > What first caught my eye was the included file conftest.c which didn't > have a specified path, which would lead me to believe that it should > be in the working directory. But that file doesn't exist anywhere for > that matter. I think these fragments either get deleted immediately, or perhaps they are somewhere in /tmp. > It seems like the file local_lim.h that refers to > linux/limits.h puts the final nail in the coffin. Could it be that I > didn't clean up my C headers when I installed them from the linux API > package so that they point to the right places for the way LFS is set > up? Although there are no such instructions for that package nor does > it list the directory of that file as files that it installs. Did you remove the untarred headers after installing them to /tools in chapter 5, and then use freshly extracted source for chapter 6 ? I do not see why that would make any difference to the headers (unlike several other packages), but I'll ask anyway. Apart from that, I guess smething went wrong in find dest/include \( -name .install -o -name ..install.cmd \) -delete cp -rv dest/include/* /usr/include Maybe you missed the copy to /usr/include ? ĸen -- Nanny Ogg usually went to bed early. After all, she was an old lady. Sometimes she went to bed as early as 6 a.m. -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page Do not top post on this list. A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style
