On Sat, Feb 20, 2021 at 04:30:46PM -0500, Stefan Vincec wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm getting an issue while configuring the gettext source in the LFS chroot
> environment
>
I was going to ask you to confirm that this is LFS-10.0, and whether
this is gettext in chapter 7 or in chapter 8 ? But the command line
below is totally wrong for gettext:
> This is my config.log
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> This file contains any messages produced by compilers while
> running configure, to aid debugging if configure makes a mistake.
>
> It was created by package-unused configure version-unused, which was
> generated by GNU Autoconf 2.69. Invocation command line was
>
> $ ../libstdc++-v3/configure CXXFLAGS=-g -O2 -D_GNU_SOURCE
> --prefix=/usr --disable-multilib --disable-nls --host=x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu
> --disable-libstdcxx-pch
That is the command line for the previous package in chapter 7,
libstdcxx.
I assume you have confused yourself about where the build failed.
I'll also note that although your web mailer claims to provide
text/plain as well as text/html the supposed plain text if full of
those (no-break-space) artifacts.
>
> ## --------- ##
> ## Platform. ##
> ## --------- ##
>
> hostname = stefan-ET2220I
> uname -m = x86_64
> uname -r = 4.19.0-14-amd64
> uname -s = Linux
> uname -v = #1 SMP Debian 4.19.171-2 (2021-01-30)
>
> /usr/bin/uname -p = unknown
> /bin/uname -X = unknown
>
[ snipping most items from here until the error ]
>
> PATH: /bin
> PATH: /usr/bin
> PATH: /sbin
> PATH: /usr/sbin
> PATH: /tools/bin
>
> ## ----------- ##
> ## Core tests. ##
> ## ----------- ##
>
> configure:3072: checking build system type
> configure:3086: result: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
> configure:3106: checking host system type
> configure:3119: result: x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu
> configure:3139: checking target system type
> configure:3152: result: x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu
> configure:3237: checking for a BSD-compatible install
> configure:3305: result: /usr/bin/install -c
> configure:3316: checking whether build environment is sane
> configure:3371: result: yes
This part looks good, until the final test which it rain fails
(previous test(s) failed, that is normal).
> configure:4137: x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu-gcc -o conftest
> conftest.c >&5
> x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu-gcc: fatal error: cannot execute 'as': execvp: No such
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> file or directory
> compilation terminated.
> configure:4140: $? = 1
> configure:4353: checking for suffix of object files
> configure:4375: x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu-gcc -c conftest.c >&5
> x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu-gcc: fatal error: cannot execute 'as': execvp: No such
> file or directory
> compilation terminated.
> configure:4379: $? = 1
> configure: failed program was:
> | /* confdefs.h */
> | #define PACKAGE_NAME "package-unused"
> | #define PACKAGE_TARNAME "libstdc++"
> | #define PACKAGE_VERSION "version-unused"
> | #define PACKAGE_STRING "package-unused version-unused"
> | #define PACKAGE_BUGREPORT ""
> | #define PACKAGE_URL ""
> | /* end confdefs.h. */
> |
> | int
> | main ()
> | {
> |
> | ;
> | return 0;
> | }
> configure:4393: error: in `/sources/gcc-10.2.0/build':
> configure:4395: error: cannot compute suffix of object files: cannot compile
> See `config.log' for more details
>
[ stripping the rest ]
> If anyone could help me that would be greatly appreciated.
For some reason, that last configure test failed to execute 'as'.
If this is LFS-10.0, for libstdc++ you are compiling the first
package in chroot.
The penultimate package in chapter 6 was binutils pass 2. That
should have installed a lot of things in /mnt/lfs/usr including
/mnt/lfs/usr/bin/as which has become /bin/as now that you are in
chroot.
Is it there ?
If it is there, from inside chroot run 'ldd'. I'm guessing that
somehow it was linked to a library on the host system.
ĸen
--
When someone told me I lived in a
fantasy land I nearly fell off my unicorn.
--
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
