On Thu, Sep 18, 2003 at 03:34:34PM +0200, Ralf S. Engelschall wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> > When installing certain programs (such as mplayer) gcc is required. Now,
> > these programs are supposed to be static, so it shouldn't matter whether
> > I compile them with gcc 3, or the gcc 2, which the whole system runs,
> > but when I installed mozilla recently it couldn't start... Ok, some of
> > the programs were compiled with dcc 2.95, since that was what I had
> > before I installed 3.x with openpkg, so I decided to recompile those
> > packages with 3.x, starting with openpkg itself. Then openpkg broke. Not
> > much to do there... 
> What does "openpkg broke" mean? What errors do you see? Please
> be more specific or nobody will be able to help you.

Hmm.. Yeah.... Not too specific... Here's the output from a random rpm
operation:
$ rpm -qa
rpmdb: unable to join the environment
error: db4 error(11) from dbenv->open: Resource temporarily unavailable
error: cannot open Packages index using db3 - Resource temporarily
unavailable (11)
error: cannot open Packages database in
/gbar/bohr/home2/gbar/gbar/openpkg/local/RPM/DB
no packages
~/openpkg/local/RPM/PKG

> > Now is it possible to use 2.95 for all packages, or
> > is there error something completely different?
> You cannot build all packages of OpenPKG with GCC 2.95, because (1) a
> large bunch of packages depend on our "gcc" package (which is 3.x) and
> (2) a subset of them really depends on gcc 3.x features and no longer
> compiles with a gcc 2.x.

Hm... Then I really hope the packages aren't sharing libraries with the
system. I don't think SUN is going to compile the Solaris programs with
gcc 3.x anytime soon.

-- 
// Mark Gj�l
Is it better to abide by the rules until they're changed or help speed the change by 
breaking them?
-- http://b0rken.dk
______________________________________________________________________
The OpenPKG Project                                    www.openpkg.org
User Communication List                      [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to