On Tue, Nov 05, 2002, David Brownlee wrote: > Well, let me the environment I'm building in now since samba is failing to > build and, although it builds, I don't think pdflib is quite right. > Why don't you think that pdflib is quite right, because of the /usr/ccs/bin/ld issue?
> build host is a non-customized "developer" install of Solaris 8 without > patches. As root, I ran "sh /openpkg-1.1.0-1.1.0.sparc64-solaris2.8-cw.sh" > which work fine. Then, still as root, I ran: > > eval `/cw/etc/rc --eval all env` > rpm -ivh gcc-3.2-1.1.0.sparc64-solaris2.8-cw.rpm > rpm -ivh binutils-2.13-1.1.0.sparc64-solaris2.8-cw.rpm > rpm -ivh make-3.79.1-1.1.0.sparc64-solaris2.8-cw.rpm > I would reccommend that to rule out cross-machine problems you only install binary packages which are built from the same machine. > The final error is irrelevant since mid-stream there are many ld errors > like this: > > Linking bin/smbd > /usr/ccs/bin/ld: illegal option -- E > usage: ld [-6:abc:d:e:f:h:il:mo:p:rstu:z:B:CD:F:GI:L:M:N:P:Q:R:S:VY:?] > file(s) > [-64] enforce a 64-bit link-edit > [-a] create an absolute file > This seems to be our main problem now, and I have a suspicion. I believe that when you install 'gcc', the path to 'ld' is hardcoded. I assume that when you built your gcc package, there was no binutils package installed. If you later install binutils, then the possibility exists that a subsequent configure script will find the GNU ld (and not native Solaris) and decide to append flags like '-E' which the native Solaris ld does not support. Try removing the binutils package, and check that the GNU is gone by doing 'which ld'. Try to look in places that samba's configure script would look and make sure there is no GNU ld there. Then build samba again. I hope that it will then not append the -E. If this doesn't work, you might try the GNU ld way: $ rpm --rebuild ftp://ftp.openpkg.org/current/SRC/binutils-2.13-20020826.src.rpm # rpm -Uvh path-to-binutils-XX-XX-sparc64-solaris2.8-cw.rpm $ rpm --rebuild ftp://ftp.openpkg.org/current/SRC/gcc-3.2-20020815.src.rpm --define "with_binutils yes" # rpm -Uvh path-to-gcc-XX-XX-sparc64-solaris2.8-cw.rpm $ rpm --rebuild ftp://ftp.openpkg.org/current/SRC/samba-2.2.6-20021017.src.rpm # rpm -Uvh path-to-samba-XX-XX-sparc64-solaris2.8-cw.rpm If this is the way (and sequence) you installed binutils and gcc before then it was correct the first time. Otherwise try it again, and pay special attention to the --define argument when installing 'gcc'. There should be no '=' inbetween 'with_binutils' and 'yes'. There are two other such arguments for gcc, by the way: 'with_cxx yes' and 'with_optimize yes'. >> %_srcrpmdir %(echo $HOME)/pkgdir/src >> ---- $HOME/.rpmmacros ---- > > Cool, I will give that a try. If I don't use a ~/.rpmmacros file, is "su - > cw" the proper way to build packages from SRPMs? How are cw-r and cw-n > used? > I've personally never built that way 'su cw', but it seems like it should work. I build as a normal user, from my home directory, and with a .rpmmacros file. Things work very well that way, but choose whatever suits your needs. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Development Team, Application Services Cable & Wireless Deutschland GmbH
msg00180/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
