Re: p54 'make -C ld clean' - no ld directory
Micheal E Cooper wrote: I have followed the book directions exactly, not customizing anything. I am using LFS 6.1, the stable version. My host system is FC4 default LFS-6.1 won't build on Fedora Core 4. Try a different host or try building the development version of LFS Andy -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: p54 'make -C ld clean' - no ld directory
Ken Moffat wrote: On Fri, 4 Nov 2005, Andrew Benton wrote: Micheal E Cooper wrote: I have followed the book directions exactly, not customizing anything. I am using LFS 6.1, the stable version. My host system is FC4 default LFS-6.1 won't build on Fedora Core 4. Try a different host or try building the development version of LFS Andy Ah, yes. Micheal could also try the testing book (destined to become 6.1.1), which certainly builds on a (LFS-svn) host running gcc-4. Ken It does compile fine with regular GCC4, but from what I've heard (never used FC4 myself) the GCC4 in FC4 is really modified and just won't work, even with the GCC4 patch. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: p54 'make -C ld clean' - no ld directory
Ah, thank you all very much for the prompt information. While I do enjoy experimentation, I think I should use the stable version, because this is my maiden voyage with LFS. I will boot from the LiveCD, get X up in 1024, and then just leave the power on until I finish making the LFS system. I am sure that using the LiveCD will prevent any future possible interferences with the host system, so in the end, the process will go faster. If I am not mistaken, I could go back to the FC4 host when my /tools are all done and working right? I will have a separate dev environ from FC4 up and running in /tools, so if I needed to, I could move back to the host system after /tools are finished, right? Ken Moffat wrote: On Fri, 4 Nov 2005, Andrew Benton wrote: Micheal E Cooper wrote: I have followed the book directions exactly, not customizing anything. I am using LFS 6.1, the stable version. My host system is FC4 default LFS-6.1 won't build on Fedora Core 4. Try a different host or try building the development version of LFS Andy Ah, yes. Micheal could also try the testing book (destined to become 6.1.1), which certainly builds on a (LFS-svn) host running gcc-4. Ken It does compile fine with regular GCC4, but from what I've heard (never used FC4 myself) the GCC4 in FC4 is really modified and just won't work, even with the GCC4 patch. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: p54 'make -C ld clean' - no ld directory
On 11/4/05, Micheal E Cooper [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If I am not mistaken, I could go back to the FC4 host when my /tools are all done and working right? I will have a separate dev environ from FC4 up and running in /tools, so if I needed to, I could move back to the host system after /tools are finished, right? Seems fine to me. Maybe there could be issues with having different kernel features in either stage, but I don't think so. Ken Moffat wrote: On Fri, 4 Nov 2005, Andrew Benton wrote: Micheal E Cooper wrote: In the first message you asked about etiquette. So now I will enlighten you to a practice called top-posting which you did a couple times. When replying to someone, it's difficult for others to know what you're talking about if your point of reference is below what your writing. In other words, you want to make your reply below the other person's message so anyone reading can jump in and understand the topic. It's also very helpful to trim out any unnecessary information like signatures or anything off-topic from what you're writing about. Then the reader doesn't have to scroll down through tons of text and try to decipher what you're referring to. Good luck on the system. -- Dan -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: p54 'make -C ld clean' - no ld directory
Micheal E Cooper wrote: As an addition and in good faith, the only FAQ entry that looks like my problem is: ld: cannot find -lc You get a message early in chapter 5 (LFS-4.1) or at the first pass of gcc (LFS CVS) which ends like this: -static -o gengenrtl \ gengenrtl.o ../libiberty/libiberty.a ld: cannot find -lc collect2: ld returned 1 exit status Your host system is probably Mandrake 9 or higher. By default, its base system does not have a static C library (/usr/lib/libc.a) which is required for the static compilation of packages. You need to install the glibc-static-devel RPM, which is on the third CD. You can verify the succesfull installation by verifying that /usr/lib/libc.a exists. If you're using LFS 4.1, check that everything in $LFS/static/bin is built static by using file $LFS/static/bin/*. If a package is not statically linked, reinstall it with the instructions from chapter 5. However, it is not the same error message, and I am getting errors when I try to install binutils itself. Also, I am using FC4, not Mandrake. Do FC4 and Mandrake have the same problem? No, the Mandrake problem is a completely unrelated issue with a much older version of lfs (and I believe that entry should be removed from the FAQ). If I end up violated etiquette, please tell me and I will change my behavior. Now onto my problem: After I went through the bin-utils configure - make - make install sequence, I tried to execute the commands on page 54: make -C ld clean But an error tells me that there is no such directory as ld. The only thing that I can think would have caused a problem is that, the first time I tried to compile and install bin-utils, I did it using the time function, with the syntax on LFS page 53. It gave me a time to use for my SBU, but nothing was written to /tools. When I then did the commands separately, in the order they are written in the book, some things were installed in /tools. However, I still get the no ld directory error when I try to do 'make -C ld clean'. Using the time function won't change anything, assuming you typed everything correctly. Since I did everything in exactly the order in the book as user lfs, I was still in my binutils-build directory, when I did the 'make -C ld clean.' Thinking that maybe I was in the wrong place, I checked /tools to see if there was an ld dir, but there wasn't. Since the book never tells you to leave the binutils-build dir (until, of course, you've completely finished the installation) the ld dir is supposed to be in binutils-build. I have followed the book directions exactly, not customizing anything. I am using LFS 6.1, the stable version. My host system is FC4 default install. I am using packages copied from the latest LFS Live CD, and I confirmed that they are the same versions as the ones in the LFS book I am using, so I don't think packages are the problem. The only thing that might be relevant is the fact that the copied-over files belong to mcooper, not user lfs. Since the perm are 644, I did not think that was part of the problem. As far as permissions/ownership for the package tarballs, the only thing that matters is that they are readable by the lfs user (and since you managed to successfully unpack the binutils tarball you obviously can read it, so permissions are not an issue in this case). Also, I looked at the errata on the LFS site and checked the FAQs, but I did not see anything that looked like it might be relevant. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page Did you pay attention to the make output and make sure there were no errors? This kind of problem is likely due to missing some important package (last time I saw someone with this error it was due to missing bison and flex on the host system) so that it won't compile any of the binutils programs. Please paste the contents of config.log. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: p54 'make -C ld clean' - no ld directory
On 11/3/05, Micheal E Cooper [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If I end up violated etiquette, please tell me and I will change my behavior. Nicely done so far by my opinion. You clearly stated your problem and any additional details you thought would be relevant. And you already searched the support docs to see if your problem was addressed. And you didn't bring an attitude or pepper your email with capitals or !!!. That kind of post will be followed up with a pretty prompt reply so long as everybody isn't stumped by your question. Now onto my problem: After I went through the bin-utils configure - make - make install sequence, I tried to execute the commands on page 54: make -C ld clean But an error tells me that there is no such directory as ld. Chris Staub's reply pretty much sums it up. You have to stay in the binutils-build directory until the whole section is done. If there's no ld directory in binutils-build, then either the configure or make commands may have bombed. Did you receive any errors? Just to do a quick follow up on the commands from wrong directory problem. This happens often to first-timers. It confused me my first time. Read Ch. 5.1 carefully http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/stable/chapter05/chapter05.html#ch-tools-introduction. This tells you many important instructions that are implied through the rest of the book. -- Dan -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
