thank you for taking the time to help.
from what you've said seems to imply I need to compile binutilities again.
so:
->write the script.
#5.4
tar xf binutils-2.25.1.tar.bz2
cd binutils-2.25.1
mkdir -v ../binutils-build
cd ../binutils-build
time { ../binutils-2.25.1/configure \
--prefix=/tools \
--with-sysroot=$LFS \
--with-lib-path=/tools/lib \
--target=$LFS_TGT \
--disable-nls \
--disable-werror && ( make 2>&1 | tee ../1binutils.compile.log && exit
$PIPESTATUS ) && echo GOOD; }
( make 2>&1 | tee ../5.4.makecompile.log && exit $PIPESTATUS ) && echo GOOD
case $(uname -m) in
x86_64) mkdir -v /tools/lib && ln -sv lib /tools/lib64 ;;
esac
( make install 2>&1 | tee ../5.4.makeinstallcompile.log && exit $PIPESTATUS
) && echo GOOD
->transfer the script
lfs@debian:/mnt/lfs/sources$ scp
[email protected]:/home/bmike1/Documents/LFS/7.8/build/5.4build.txt
$LFS/sources
[email protected]'s password:
5.4build.txt 100% 671 0.7KB/s 00:00
(I just realized I could have used a dot instead of $LFS/sources)
run the script (I tried to run it 2 hours ago but it wouldn't)
http://pastebin.com/mURBzn0B
<end of ran script>
make[3]: Entering directory
`/mnt/lfs/sources/binutils-build/libiberty/testsuite'
make[3]: Nothing to be done for `install'.
make[3]: Leaving directory
`/mnt/lfs/sources/binutils-build/libiberty/testsuite'
make[2]: Leaving directory `/mnt/lfs/sources/binutils-build/libiberty'
make[1]: Nothing to be done for `install-target'.
make[1]: Leaving directory `/mnt/lfs/sources/binutils-build'
GOOD
it appears to have run successfully.
On Sun, Oct 25, 2015 at 9:55 PM, Ken Moffat <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 25, 2015 at 07:01:26PM -0400, Michael Havens wrote:
> > I followed the instruction yet the compile still will not complete.
> >
> > compile log: http://pastebin.com/Bsri0v4n
> >
> > I looked through the compile log and the only errors I could find not
> > associated with code was:
> >
> > checking for suffix of object files... configure: error: in
> > `/mnt/lfs/sources/gcc-build/x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu/libgcc':
> > configure: error: cannot compute suffix of object files: cannot compile
> > See `config.log' for more details.
> > make[1]: *** [configure-target-libgcc] Error 1
> > make[1]: Leaving directory `/mnt/lfs/sources/gcc-build'
> > make: *** [all] Error 2
> >
> > which led me to look into the configure log.
> >
> > config log: http://pastebin.com/s8C5Gv5f
> >
>
> Welcome to gcc ;-) This is one of the (few) packages which runs
> 'configure' in multiple directories *from make* (binutils and gcc
> are similar, if my memory is correct).
>
> What you have to do is work out in which directory configure was last
> run, i.e. identify the *newest* config.log file and then search for
> 'cannot compute suffix of object files'. Use less or vim to search,
> e.g.
>
> /cannot\ compute\ suffix
>
> will probably take you to the right part of the file, then look back
> at the lines before that - you should see that a code fragment was
> created, probably with a message related to testing the suffix of
> object files, and then you should see what happened when configure
> tried to run that fragment. i.e. A "real" descriptive error.
> And then after that the "translation" to the 'cannot compile'
> message.
>
> I had that message once, years ago, when I passed invalid CFLAGS (my
> script failed to correctly detect it was not running on a ppc64, and
> used a machine-specific optimization). Your error will be different,
> and at this point I will guess that pass-1 binutils was not
> correctly installed, i.e. lfs version of one of the programs was not
> found. Alternatively, your gcc script might have lost the variable.
> But all should be clear when you read the actual error message.
>
> > This reveals many errors not associated with code:
> >
> > configure:6002: gcc -o conftest -g -O2 -I$$r/$(HOST_SUBDIR)/gmp
> -I$$s/gmp
> > -I$$r/$(HOST_SUBDIR)/mpfr/src -I$$s/mpfr/src -I$$s/mpc/src -lisl
> > conftest.c -lisl >&5
> > conftest.c:10:21: fatal error: isl/val.h: No such file or directory
> > compilation terminated.
> > configure:6002: $? = 1
> > configure: failed program was:
> > | /* confdefs.h */
> > | #define PACKAGE_NAME ""
> > | #define PACKAGE_TARNAME ""
> > | #define PACKAGE_VERSION ""
> > | #define PACKAGE_STRING ""
> > | #define PACKAGE_BUGREPORT ""
> > | #define PACKAGE_URL ""
> > | #define LT_OBJDIR ".libs/"
> > | /* end confdefs.h. */
> > | #include <isl/val.h>
> > | int
> > | main ()
> > | {
> > | ;
> > | ;
> > | return 0;
> > | }
>
> That hunk, perhaps with some lines before it to specify what it is
> testing for, is normal. Configure scripts are ideally
> system-agnostic - the build might not even be on linux. In
> addition, many configure scripts use a lot of gnu boilerplate, e.g.
> things like checking for Fortran. So, many configure tests are
> expected to fail, and to produce 'error' reports in config.log.
>
> Oh, and your previous use of dash is normally expected to break the
> glibc build, so yes, you needed to fix it, but it wasn't likely to
> be the cause of this build failure.
>
> Take it slowly, at this point the main things you need to do are to
> learn (the cp / tar business), and then to remember what you learn.
> Eventually, you will be able to diagnose most of your own build
> problems, but it needs practise.
>
> ĸen
> --
> Il Porcupino Nil Sodomy Est! (if you will excuse my latatian)
> aka "The hedgehog song"
> --
> 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
>
--
:-)~MIKE~(-:
--
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
