On Sat, Sep 05, 2009 at 01:43:14AM +1000, Finn Thain wrote: > > On Tue, 1 Sep 2009, Stephen R Marenka wrote: > > > On Tue, Sep 01, 2009 at 12:16:27AM +0200, mike wrote: > > > Btw, i noticed an error > > > http://people.debian.org/~smarenka/d-i/m68k/images/daily/build_nativehd.log > > > E: Couldn't find package libnss-dns-udeb > > > make[2]: *** [stamps/get_udebs-nativehd-stamp] Error 100 > > > make[1]: *** [_build] Error 2 > > > make: *** [build_nativehd] Error 2 > > > > Yep. debian-installer dailies are now *dead* until we get a modern libc > > working. > > I wonder whether there are debian source packages for binutils, gcc and > glibc having TLS/NPTL support for m68k.
I'd be surprised if that were the case. > The patches posted to the binutils mailing list are incomplete. The > binutils patch at > http://people.debian.org/~smarenka/m68k/tls/ > is broken according to Kolla: > http://lists.debian.org/debian-68k/2009/07/msg00001.html > > But in that post (June 28) Maxim recommends using mainline binutils, and > since then we have HJL binutils-2.19.51.0.14 released, "...based on > binutils 2009 0722 in CVS on sourceware.org..." So I guess I should start > there. > > I understand that the current GCC (4.4) lacks the necessary patches, and > 4.5 is still uncooked (and that's a scary prospect). Can someone confirm > that this is the necessary patch for 4.4: > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2009-05/msg01024.html > Presumably not this one? > http://people.debian.org/~smarenka/m68k/tls/gcc_patch2 > (and gcc_patch1 is clearly broken... perhaps it was actually the same > thing before being mangled... Stephen, I don't think this "/tls" directory > is helping any.) Shall I remove it then? > Or perhaps there is a known-good gcc 4.5 snapshot (FWIW, I'd much rather > patch a debian compiler instead, which means 4.4 or preferably older.) It would be wonderful to have debian gcc 4.4 building on m68k. It never has. > As for eglibc, there are a number of branches listed here, > http://www.eglibc.org/repository > The question is, which branch, snapshot or release might meet be suitable? > > With this information, I could attempt to build a toolchain from upstream > sources, or figure out whether or not the debian archive has the necessary > source packages... The life is fast ebbing from debian/m68k as far as I can tell. I'm not sure if there is sufficient energy to revitalize it. I'd be delighted to be proven wrong. Peace, Stephen -- Stephen R. Marenka If life's not fun, you're not doing it right! <[email protected]> -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-m68k" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
