Re: [lfs-support] Compile error glibc2.33 -> binutils-2.36.1

[Frans de Boer]

On 10/02/2021 02:49, Ken Moffat wrote:

On Tue, Feb 09, 2021 at 05:14:09PM -0500, Jean-Marc Pigeon wrote:

Hello,
On Tue, 2021-02-09 at 18:27 +, Ken Moffat wrote:

On Tue, Feb 09, 2021 at 12:29:14AM +, Ken Moffat wrote:

On Mon, Feb 08, 2021 at 03:52:35AM +, Ken Moffat wrote:

../configure --prefix=/usr    \
  --disable-werror \
  --enable-kernel=3.2  \
  --enable-stack-protector=strong  \
  --with-headers=/usr/include  \
  libc_cv_slibdir=/lib
libc_cv_include_x86_isa_level=no


[...]

Well I don't need that workaround for using '-march=native -O2' on
my skylake, it booted successfully.  Fortunately, Frans said it
works for him, and htat distros are using it, so I guess we too
should use it.

However, there was one problem other than my own typos in editing
scripts - tried to build linux-5.10.13 -

   CC  arch/x86/kernel/apic/apic.o
make[3]: *** [scripts/Makefile.build:279:
arch/x86/kernel/apic/apic.o] Segmentation fault

Exact same problem here (not a memory problem, or very big
"cosmic ray"). same problem on kernel-5.10.9 too.
this happen using glibc-2.33 AND binutils-2.36.1

rebuilding from scratch using binutils-2.36.1 and keeping
glibc-2.32 make the segmentation fault (I previously restarted
build from scratch with glibc-2.32 + binutils-2.35.1, kernel
compilation was OK).
My conclusion, binutils is the trouble maker.
Could somebody confirm this finding?
Google is mute on this subject but may be my search
keywords were not that good.
advices? suggestions?


Wow!  I hadn't thought of trying binutils-2.36.1 with glibc-2.32
(partly because I'd prefer to use glibc-2.33 because of its iconv
fixes).

And I'm surprised at 5.10.9 because based on the kernel list and
binutils-bugs I had thought that would crap out in objcopy (with an
error message about the sections, not a segfault).

This does sound as if it is a real problem, but I guess the reason
google is not coming up with anything is that binutils-2.36 and
2.36.1 are fresh.  Normally we try to keep on the cutting edge
rather than the bleeding edge, but this time we've maybe overshot.

Just to be clear (before Bruce asks, I know he distrusts using any
CFLAGS) - are you building with any variant of -march= ?  And what
CPU are you building on ?

I'm still not ready to start my next build, but suddenly I'm even
less looking forward to it :)

If this is a common problem, I would have though Bruce would have
seen it when he updated to 2.36 and 2.36.1 - so I assume there is
some other factor which is not yet obvious.

ĸen
I have rebuild the SysVinit as well as the Systemd version from the dev 
version plus the additional libc... flag for glibc as well as the extra 
flag for binutils.
I had problems before, but after removing the stale CFLAGS variable, I 
could compile everything and successfully booted the resulting images on 
my older but still capable Phenom II based system. Same at an older XEON 
system.


--- Frans.
--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Compile error glibc2.33

[Frans de Boer]

On 08/02/2021 05:05, Bruce Dubbs wrote:

On 2/7/21 9:52 PM, Ken Moffat wrote:

On Mon, Feb 08, 2021 at 11:14:22AM +0800, xry...@mengyan1223.wang wrote:
    Please help me to test my glibc workaround in this thread. If it 
works,
    crt1.o should have no "needed" ISA markers (even x86-64-baseline 
should

    not be there). Then we can add it as a note in the book.
    If it was on binutils sid, it should be diagnosticed already in the
    editors' builds. We use -march in GMP and libffi so their test 
suites

    would immediately fail, if it was a binutils issue.
    I think it's not glibc devs, just other packagers or distro 
maintainers
    like us thought it was a binutils issue. I actually left a wrong 
comment

    in the BZ. No way to delete it :(.
    Sorry again for the bad formatting on my phone.


Thanks for reminding me of that workaround, I'd lost sight of it. To
quote you from upthread -

| You can turn off ISA marker with "libc_cv_include_x86_isa_level=no".
| Just append it to glibc configure line, like:

../configure --prefix=/usr    \
  --disable-werror \
  --enable-kernel=3.2  \
  --enable-stack-protector=strong  \
  --with-headers=/usr/include  \
  libc_cv_slibdir=/lib libc_cv_include_x86_isa_level=no


Just a minor tweak.  I had to read this closely to understand it:

../configure --prefix=/usr    \
  --disable-werror    \
  --enable-kernel=3.2 \
  --enable-stack-protector=strong \
  --with-headers=/usr/include \
  libc_cv_slibdir=/lib    \
  libc_cv_include_x86_isa_level=no

  -- Bruce

I did not mention it explicitly, but as soon as Xi mentioned the 
workaround, I tried it. It works on my older system. It also seems that 
distributors are now also using this workaround.


One question I have: where can we find those libc_... switches? I have 
searched for it before, but could not find it


--- Frans.

--
A: Yes, just like thatA: Ja, net zo
Q: Oh, Just like reading a book backwards Q: Oh, net als een boek 
achterstevoren lezen
A: Because it upsets the natural flow of a story  A: Omdat het de natuurlijke 
gang uit het verhaal haalt
Q: Why is top-posting annoying?   Q: Waarom is Top-posting zo 
irritant?

--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Problem with grub and patch to dev.

[Frans de Boer]

On 07/02/2021 18:19, Bruce Dubbs wrote:

On 2/7/21 8:11 AM, Pierre Labastie wrote:

On Sun, 2021-02-07 at 14:15 +0100, Pierre Labastie wrote:

On Sun, 2021-02-07 at 13:38 +0100, Frans de Boer wrote:

LS,

Finally had a change to finish the LFS build. Alas, the grub-
install
reported the old error "Decompression is too big".
Here is the solution to add to the section to compile grub:

# Patch gentpl.py to avoid an error from grub-mkinstall
"Decompressor
is
too big"
# Source:
https://www.mail-archive.com/grub-devel@gnu.org/msg29840.html
#
sed -i -E "s@(.*-R .note.gnu.gold-version -R)(.*)@\1
.note.gnu.property
-R\2@" gentpl.py
ln -fs /usr/bin/python3 /usr/bin/python  # grub needs 'python'
./autogen.sh
rm -f /usr/bin/python



Very interesting, thanks! There are several hundreds of commits in
grub
repositories since the last release. I hope we'll see a release
soon...

For us, instead of running autogen, can't the generated file be
patched
directly? I looks like gentpl.py generates Makefile.*.am, and my
guess
is that this ends up in Makefile.*.in after running autofu...

Will look more closely


Yes this can be simplified to (sorry for format, need to fit into 80
chars per line):
sed -i -E \
"s@(.*-R .note.gnu.gold-version -R)(.*)@\1 .note.gnu.property -R\2@" \
  Makefile.in grub-core/Makefile.in


I think it can be made shorter:

"/(version -R)/s/\1 .note.gnu.property -R/"

But not tested.

  -- Bruce




before running configure. Results:
- without the sed, after make:
--
$ ls -l grub-core/lzma*
-rwxr-xr-x 1 pierre pierre  4972  7 févr. 15:01 grub-
core/lzma_decompress.image
-rwxr-xr-x 1 pierre pierre 134479612  7 févr. 15:01 grub-
core/lzma_decompress.img
--
- with the sed, after make:
--
$ ls -l grub-core/lzma*
-rwxr-xr-x 1 pierre pierre 4972  7 févr. 15:09 grub-
core/lzma_decompress.image
-rwxr-xr-x 1 pierre pierre 2848  7 févr. 15:09 grub-
core/lzma_decompress.img
--

If nobody speaks up, will add that tomorrow to grub page.

Pierre




Pierre has a one line solution devised to be applied to the recipient file:

Can be further simplified to:
sed -e 's/\.note\.gnu\.gold-version/& -R .note.gnu.property/' \
-i Makefile.in grub-core/Makefile.in

Just before configure (no need to run autogen, nor to relink python)

It works too and is confirmed by at least two people ;)

BTW: the sed -e ... can be changed to sed  The -e is only required 
when there is more then one command to be executed by sed.


--- Frans.

--
A: Yes, just like thatA: Ja, net zo
Q: Oh, Just like reading a book backwards Q: Oh, net als een boek 
achterstevoren lezen
A: Because it upsets the natural flow of a story  A: Omdat het de natuurlijke 
gang uit het verhaal haalt
Q: Why is top-posting annoying?   Q: Waarom is Top-posting zo 
irritant?

--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Problem with grub and patch to dev.

[Frans de Boer]

On 07/02/2021 15:26, Jim Martin wrote:

On 2/7/21 6:38 AM, Frans de Boer wrote:

LS,

Finally had a change to finish the LFS build. Alas, the grub-install 
reported the old error "Decompression is too big".

Here is the solution to add to the section to compile grub:

# Patch gentpl.py to avoid an error from grub-mkinstall "Decompressor 
is too big"

# Source: https://www.mail-archive.com/grub-devel@gnu.org/msg29840.html
#
sed -i -E "s@(.*-R .note.gnu.gold-version -R)(.*)@\1 
.note.gnu.property -R\2@" gentpl.py

ln -fs /usr/bin/python3 /usr/bin/python  # grub needs 'python'
./autogen.sh
rm -f /usr/bin/python

./configure ...

--- Frans.

Thanks for this Frans ! I just ran across this same error yesterday 
working with LFS - Version 20210206-systemd.


I also noticed that the grub-install actually worked in spite of this 
error.


Much to my surprise the system actually booted ...

I am working through the LFS- Version 20210206-systemd install again 
and will add in the fix and see how it goes...


Jim

It works on sysvinit and systemd configurations. After all, the compile 
of grub is the same for both versions. And, yes, the systems will boot, 
but when using scripts to build LFS and being halted because of errors, 
I added the last three lines to get everything cleanly compiled and 
installed.


Pierre is looking if there is another patch possible. For now we can 
work with it.


--- Frans.

--
A: Yes, just like thatA: Ja, net zo
Q: Oh, Just like reading a book backwards Q: Oh, net als een boek 
achterstevoren lezen
A: Because it upsets the natural flow of a story  A: Omdat het de natuurlijke 
gang uit het verhaal haalt
Q: Why is top-posting annoying?   Q: Waarom is Top-posting zo 
irritant?

--
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

[lfs-support] Problem with grub and patch to dev.

[Frans de Boer]

LS,

Finally had a change to finish the LFS build. Alas, the grub-install 
reported the old error "Decompression is too big".

Here is the solution to add to the section to compile grub:

# Patch gentpl.py to avoid an error from grub-mkinstall "Decompressor is 
too big"

# Source: https://www.mail-archive.com/grub-devel@gnu.org/msg29840.html
#
sed -i -E "s@(.*-R .note.gnu.gold-version -R)(.*)@\1 .note.gnu.property 
-R\2@" gentpl.py

ln -fs /usr/bin/python3 /usr/bin/python  # grub needs 'python'
./autogen.sh
rm -f /usr/bin/python

./configure ...

--- Frans.

--
A: Yes, just like thatA: Ja, net zo
Q: Oh, Just like reading a book backwards Q: Oh, net als een boek 
achterstevoren lezen
A: Because it upsets the natural flow of a story  A: Omdat het de natuurlijke 
gang uit het verhaal haalt
Q: Why is top-posting annoying?   Q: Waarom is Top-posting zo 
irritant?

--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Compile error glibc2.33

[Frans de Boer]

On 06/02/2021 15:46, Xi Ruoyao wrote:

On 2021-02-06 14:56 +0100, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 06/02/2021 14:34, Pierre Labastie wrote:

On Sat, 2021-02-06 at 13:43 +0100, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 05/02/2021 21:35, Pierre Labastie wrote:

On Fri, 2021-02-05 at 20:54 +0100, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 05/02/2021 20:16, Frans de Boer wrote:


On 05/02/2021 16:25, xry...@mengyan1223.wang wrote:


Hi Frans,


Could you send the result of

$LFS_TGT-readelf -a $LFS/lib/libc.so.6 | grep ISA


    The line '$LFS_TGT-readelf -a $LFS/lib/libc.so.6 | grep ISA'
returns
nothing.

You need to use readelf from binutils 2.36. If you have back up to
2.35.1, it returns nothing.

Pierre


Okay, I have recompiled ch5, ch6 and ch7 as well as up to and
including
glibc-2.33 and using binutils-2.36.
Attached is the result of that latest config.log (ch8). Other results
are found in previous messages.

Also, the output of readelf in ch8:
  Properties: x86 ISA needed: x86-64-baseline, x86-64-v2, x86-64-v3
    x86 ISA used: x86-64-baseline, x86-64-v2, x86-64-v3, x86-64-v4

AFAICT, no one among the editors have the first line. Only baseline is
"needed", not v2 nor v3, although we have more recent CPUs. I cannot
tell how this "needed" line is determined, but I see in config.log you
have -march=native. Maybe you could try without any CFLAGS, and check
that you do not have the v2 and v3 in "needed".

BTW, you say you have the warning, but it does not stop the build does
it? Everyone seems to have the warning in a couple of tests in binutils
chapter 8 (ld tests).

with as contrast to the ch5 output:
     Properties: x86 ISA needed: x86-64-baseline
    x86 ISA used: x86-64-baseline, x86-64-v2, x86-64-v3, x86-64-v4

However, still getting the next message during testing.
'/sources-base/glibc-2.33/glibc-build/libc.so.6: CPU ISA level is
lower
than required'

After the tests and install, I get the ISA message with everything I
do.
Maybe the x86_64-baseline is not the original baseline anymore,
thereby
making my processor and many others obsolete according to the glibc
devs?
Maybe adding --with-CPU to the configuration might help?

Well, as said above, try without flags. Then you could add them one by
one...

Pierre


No, the tests do not stop because I use the 'make -k' option. But can't
run anything afterwards because of this error.
BTW, I just tried the --with-cpu=amdfam10 to configure. It halts stating
that this "subspecies" is not supported.

So, it seems that the glibc dev where playing god and decided that
anything less then the newest processors should have no means to exist
anymore. So, I stick for now with the glib-2.32 version and continue later.
Maybe someone will figure out how to get rid of this absurd ISA level
check, blocking millions to billions of systems from future updates!!

Don't assume the upstream is trying to "fight against you".

It's now reported and the upstream is trying to find a solution:
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27318

For now the best workaround seems "don't use -march".
I did not mentioned a fight or anything in that order. Just that this is 
in line with other recent trends of trying to ignore older - but still 
capable - processors and the current worldwide installed base.

Frans.
--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Compile error glibc2.33 (SOLVED more or less)

[Frans de Boer]

On 06/02/2021 14:34, Pierre Labastie wrote:

On Sat, 2021-02-06 at 13:43 +0100, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 05/02/2021 21:35, Pierre Labastie wrote:

On Fri, 2021-02-05 at 20:54 +0100, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 05/02/2021 20:16, Frans de Boer wrote:
   
   
On 05/02/2021 16:25, xry...@mengyan1223.wang wrote:
   
   
Hi Frans,


Could you send the result of

$LFS_TGT-readelf -a $LFS/lib/libc.so.6 | grep ISA


   The line '$LFS_TGT-readelf -a $LFS/lib/libc.so.6 | grep ISA'
returns
nothing.

You need to use readelf from binutils 2.36. If you have back up to
2.35.1, it returns nothing.

Pierre


Okay, I have recompiled ch5, ch6 and ch7 as well as up to and
including
glibc-2.33 and using binutils-2.36.
Attached is the result of that latest config.log (ch8). Other results
are found in previous messages.

Also, the output of readelf in ch8:
     Properties: x86 ISA needed: x86-64-baseline, x86-64-v2, x86-64-v3
   x86 ISA used: x86-64-baseline, x86-64-v2, x86-64-v3, x86-64-v4

AFAICT, no one among the editors have the first line. Only baseline is
"needed", not v2 nor v3, although we have more recent CPUs. I cannot
tell how this "needed" line is determined, but I see in config.log you
have -march=native. Maybe you could try without any CFLAGS, and check
that you do not have the v2 and v3 in "needed".

BTW, you say you have the warning, but it does not stop the build does
it? Everyone seems to have the warning in a couple of tests in binutils
chapter 8 (ld tests).

with as contrast to the ch5 output:
    Properties: x86 ISA needed: x86-64-baseline
       x86 ISA used: x86-64-baseline, x86-64-v2, x86-64-v3, x86-64-v4

However, still getting the next message during testing.
'/sources-base/glibc-2.33/glibc-build/libc.so.6: CPU ISA level is
lower
than required'

After the tests and install, I get the ISA message with everything I
do.
Maybe the x86_64-baseline is not the original baseline anymore,
thereby
making my processor and many others obsolete according to the glibc
devs?
Maybe adding --with-CPU to the configuration might help?

Well, as said above, try without flags. Then you could add them one by
one...

Pierre

Okay, long ago I added these compiler flags, removed them when compiling 
the new ch7, but forgot last year to remove them for the chroot script 
for ch8 and later.
Still not an optimized compile, but at least I can move on. Knowing that 
this might not last either depending upon the devs wimps.


Also, the output of readelf is now also:
    Properties: x86 ISA needed: x86-64-baseline
    x86 ISA used: x86-64-baseline, x86-64-v2, x86-64-v3, x86-64-v4

Frans.

--
A: Yes, just like thatA: Ja, net zo
Q: Oh, Just like reading a book backwards Q: Oh, net als een boek 
achterstevoren lezen
A: Because it upsets the natural flow of a story  A: Omdat het de natuurlijke 
gang uit het verhaal haalt
Q: Why is top-posting annoying?   Q: Waarom is Top-posting zo 
irritant?

--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Compile error glibc2.33

[Frans de Boer]

On 06/02/2021 14:34, Pierre Labastie wrote:

On Sat, 2021-02-06 at 13:43 +0100, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 05/02/2021 21:35, Pierre Labastie wrote:

On Fri, 2021-02-05 at 20:54 +0100, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 05/02/2021 20:16, Frans de Boer wrote:
   
   
On 05/02/2021 16:25, xry...@mengyan1223.wang wrote:
   
   
Hi Frans,


Could you send the result of

$LFS_TGT-readelf -a $LFS/lib/libc.so.6 | grep ISA


   The line '$LFS_TGT-readelf -a $LFS/lib/libc.so.6 | grep ISA'
returns
nothing.

You need to use readelf from binutils 2.36. If you have back up to
2.35.1, it returns nothing.

Pierre


Okay, I have recompiled ch5, ch6 and ch7 as well as up to and
including
glibc-2.33 and using binutils-2.36.
Attached is the result of that latest config.log (ch8). Other results
are found in previous messages.

Also, the output of readelf in ch8:
     Properties: x86 ISA needed: x86-64-baseline, x86-64-v2, x86-64-v3
   x86 ISA used: x86-64-baseline, x86-64-v2, x86-64-v3, x86-64-v4

AFAICT, no one among the editors have the first line. Only baseline is
"needed", not v2 nor v3, although we have more recent CPUs. I cannot
tell how this "needed" line is determined, but I see in config.log you
have -march=native. Maybe you could try without any CFLAGS, and check
that you do not have the v2 and v3 in "needed".

BTW, you say you have the warning, but it does not stop the build does
it? Everyone seems to have the warning in a couple of tests in binutils
chapter 8 (ld tests).

with as contrast to the ch5 output:
    Properties: x86 ISA needed: x86-64-baseline
       x86 ISA used: x86-64-baseline, x86-64-v2, x86-64-v3, x86-64-v4

However, still getting the next message during testing.
'/sources-base/glibc-2.33/glibc-build/libc.so.6: CPU ISA level is
lower
than required'

After the tests and install, I get the ISA message with everything I
do.
Maybe the x86_64-baseline is not the original baseline anymore,
thereby
making my processor and many others obsolete according to the glibc
devs?
Maybe adding --with-CPU to the configuration might help?

Well, as said above, try without flags. Then you could add them one by
one...

Pierre

I will try that as a last resort. Have not read your previous suggestion 
completely ;)


--
A: Yes, just like thatA: Ja, net zo
Q: Oh, Just like reading a book backwards Q: Oh, net als een boek 
achterstevoren lezen
A: Because it upsets the natural flow of a story  A: Omdat het de natuurlijke 
gang uit het verhaal haalt
Q: Why is top-posting annoying?   Q: Waarom is Top-posting zo 
irritant?

--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Compile error glibc2.33

[Frans de Boer]

On 06/02/2021 14:34, Pierre Labastie wrote:

On Sat, 2021-02-06 at 13:43 +0100, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 05/02/2021 21:35, Pierre Labastie wrote:

On Fri, 2021-02-05 at 20:54 +0100, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 05/02/2021 20:16, Frans de Boer wrote:
   
   
On 05/02/2021 16:25, xry...@mengyan1223.wang wrote:
   
   
Hi Frans,


Could you send the result of

$LFS_TGT-readelf -a $LFS/lib/libc.so.6 | grep ISA


   The line '$LFS_TGT-readelf -a $LFS/lib/libc.so.6 | grep ISA'
returns
nothing.

You need to use readelf from binutils 2.36. If you have back up to
2.35.1, it returns nothing.

Pierre


Okay, I have recompiled ch5, ch6 and ch7 as well as up to and
including
glibc-2.33 and using binutils-2.36.
Attached is the result of that latest config.log (ch8). Other results
are found in previous messages.

Also, the output of readelf in ch8:
     Properties: x86 ISA needed: x86-64-baseline, x86-64-v2, x86-64-v3
   x86 ISA used: x86-64-baseline, x86-64-v2, x86-64-v3, x86-64-v4

AFAICT, no one among the editors have the first line. Only baseline is
"needed", not v2 nor v3, although we have more recent CPUs. I cannot
tell how this "needed" line is determined, but I see in config.log you
have -march=native. Maybe you could try without any CFLAGS, and check
that you do not have the v2 and v3 in "needed".

BTW, you say you have the warning, but it does not stop the build does
it? Everyone seems to have the warning in a couple of tests in binutils
chapter 8 (ld tests).

with as contrast to the ch5 output:
    Properties: x86 ISA needed: x86-64-baseline
       x86 ISA used: x86-64-baseline, x86-64-v2, x86-64-v3, x86-64-v4

However, still getting the next message during testing.
'/sources-base/glibc-2.33/glibc-build/libc.so.6: CPU ISA level is
lower
than required'

After the tests and install, I get the ISA message with everything I
do.
Maybe the x86_64-baseline is not the original baseline anymore,
thereby
making my processor and many others obsolete according to the glibc
devs?
Maybe adding --with-CPU to the configuration might help?

Well, as said above, try without flags. Then you could add them one by
one...

Pierre

No, the tests do not stop because I use the 'make -k' option. But can't 
run anything afterwards because of this error.
BTW, I just tried the --with-cpu=amdfam10 to configure. It halts stating 
that this "subspecies" is not supported.


So, it seems that the glibc dev where playing god and decided that 
anything less then the newest processors should have no means to exist 
anymore. So, I stick for now with the glib-2.32 version and continue later.
Maybe someone will figure out how to get rid of this absurd ISA level 
check, blocking millions to billions of systems from future updates!!


Frans.

--
A: Yes, just like thatA: Ja, net zo
Q: Oh, Just like reading a book backwards Q: Oh, net als een boek 
achterstevoren lezen
A: Because it upsets the natural flow of a story  A: Omdat het de natuurlijke 
gang uit het verhaal haalt
Q: Why is top-posting annoying?   Q: Waarom is Top-posting zo 
irritant?

--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Compile error glibc2.33

[Frans de Boer]

On 05/02/2021 21:35, Pierre Labastie wrote:

On Fri, 2021-02-05 at 20:54 +0100, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 05/02/2021 20:16, Frans de Boer wrote:
  
  
On 05/02/2021 16:25, xry...@mengyan1223.wang wrote:
  
  
Hi Frans,


Could you send the result of

$LFS_TGT-readelf -a $LFS/lib/libc.so.6 | grep ISA


  The line '$LFS_TGT-readelf -a $LFS/lib/libc.so.6 | grep ISA' returns
nothing.

You need to use readelf from binutils 2.36. If you have back up to
2.35.1, it returns nothing.

Pierre

Okay, I have recompiled ch5, ch6 and ch7 as well as up to and including 
glibc-2.33 and using binutils-2.36.
Attached is the result of that latest config.log (ch8). Other results 
are found in previous messages.


Also, the output of readelf in ch8:
   Properties: x86 ISA needed: x86-64-baseline, x86-64-v2, x86-64-v3
 x86 ISA used: x86-64-baseline, x86-64-v2, x86-64-v3, x86-64-v4

with as contrast to the ch5 output:
  Properties: x86 ISA needed: x86-64-baseline
     x86 ISA used: x86-64-baseline, x86-64-v2, x86-64-v3, x86-64-v4

However, still getting the next message during testing.
'/sources-base/glibc-2.33/glibc-build/libc.so.6: CPU ISA level is lower 
than required'


After the tests and install, I get the ISA message with everything I do.
Maybe the x86_64-baseline is not the original baseline anymore, thereby 
making my processor and many others obsolete according to the glibc devs?

Maybe adding --with-CPU to the configuration might help?

Frans

--
A: Yes, just like thatA: Ja, net zo
Q: Oh, Just like reading a book backwards Q: Oh, net als een boek 
achterstevoren lezen
A: Because it upsets the natural flow of a story  A: Omdat het de natuurlijke 
gang uit het verhaal haalt
Q: Why is top-posting annoying?   Q: Waarom is Top-posting zo 
irritant?

This file contains any messages produced by compilers while
running configure, to aid debugging if configure makes a mistake.

It was created by GNU C Library configure (see version.h), which was
generated by GNU Autoconf 2.69.  Invocation command line was

  $ /sources-base/glibc-2.33/configure --prefix=/usr --libdir=/usr/lib --disable-werror --enable-kernel=3.2 --enable-stack-protector=strong --with-headers=/usr/include libc_cv_slibdir=/lib

## - ##
## Platform. ##
## - ##

hostname = pws1
uname -m = x86_64
uname -r = 5.8.18-FdB-pws1
uname -s = Linux
uname -v = #2 SMP Fri Jan 29 22:05:14 CET 2021

/usr/bin/uname -p = unknown
/bin/uname -X = unknown

/bin/arch  = unknown
/usr/bin/arch -k   = unknown
/usr/convex/getsysinfo = unknown
/usr/bin/hostinfo  = unknown
/bin/machine   = unknown
/usr/bin/oslevel   = unknown
/bin/universe  = unknown

PATH: /bin
PATH: /usr/bin
PATH: /sbin
PATH: /usr/sbin


## --- ##
## Core tests. ##
## --- ##

configure:2213: checking build system type
configure:2227: result: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
configure:2247: checking host system type
configure:2260: result: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
configure:2329: checking for gcc
configure:2345: found /usr/bin/gcc
configure:2356: result: gcc
configure:2585: checking for C compiler version
configure:2594: gcc --version >&5
gcc (GCC) 10.2.0
Copyright (C) 2020 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the source for copying conditions.  There is NO
warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

configure:2605: $? = 0
configure:2594: gcc -v >&5
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=gcc
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/libexec/gcc/x86_64-cross-linux-gnu/10.2.0/lto-wrapper
Target: x86_64-cross-linux-gnu
Configured with: /mnt/lfs/sources-base/gcc-10.2.0/configure --prefix=/usr --host=x86_64-cross-linux-gnu --build=x86_64-suse-linux-gnu CC_FOR_TARGET=x86_64-cross-linux-gnu-gcc --with-build-sysroot=/mnt/lfs --enable-initfine-array --enable-languages=c,c++ --disable-multilib --disable-nls --disable-decimal-float --disable-libatomic --disable-libgomp --disable-libquadmath --disable-libssp --disable-libvtv --disable-libstdcxx
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib
gcc version 10.2.0 (GCC) 
configure:2605: $? = 0
configure:2594: gcc -V >&5
gcc: error: unrecognized command-line option '-V'
gcc: fatal error: no input files
compilation terminated.
configure:2605: $? = 1
configure:2594: gcc -qversion >&5
gcc: error: unrecognized command-line option '-qversion'; did you mean '--version'?
gcc: fatal error: no input files
compilation terminated.
configure:2605: $? = 1
configure:2610: checking for suffix of object files
configure:2632: gcc -c -O2 -march=native  conftest.c >&5
configure:2636: $? = 0
configure:2657: result: o
configure:2661: checking whether we are using the GNU C compiler
configure:2680: gcc -c -O2 -march=native  conftest.c >&5
configure:2680: $? = 0
configure:2689: result: yes
configure:2698: checking whether gcc accepts -g
configure:2718: gcc -c -g  conftest.c >&5
configure:2718: $? = 0
con

Re: [lfs-support] Compile error glibc2.33

[Frans de Boer]

On 05/02/2021 22:23, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 05/02/2021 21:54, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 05/02/2021 21:35, Pierre Labastie wrote:

On Fri, 2021-02-05 at 20:54 +0100, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 05/02/2021 20:16, Frans de Boer wrote:

  On 05/02/2021 16:25, xry...@mengyan1223.wang wrote:

  Hi Frans,

Could you send the result of

$LFS_TGT-readelf -a $LFS/lib/libc.so.6 | grep ISA


  The line '$LFS_TGT-readelf -a $LFS/lib/libc.so.6 | grep ISA' returns
nothing.

You need to use readelf from binutils 2.36. If you have back up to
2.35.1, it returns nothing.

Pierre

Now recompiling with binutils-2.36 and glibc-2.33. I will later send 
the config.log from ch5 (not ch6) and tomorrow morning (UTC-1) the 
config.log from ch8.


Frans.

glibc-2.33 config.log from ch5.
Maybe later the result from readelf, otherwise tomorrow.

Frans.


Quicker then expected: The result from readelf after glibc-2.33 in ch5.

  Properties: x86 ISA needed: x86-64-baseline
    x86 ISA used: x86-64-baseline, x86-64-v2, x86-64-v3, x86-64-v4

Frans.

--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Compile error glibc2.33

[Frans de Boer]

On 05/02/2021 21:54, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 05/02/2021 21:35, Pierre Labastie wrote:

On Fri, 2021-02-05 at 20:54 +0100, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 05/02/2021 20:16, Frans de Boer wrote:

  On 05/02/2021 16:25, xry...@mengyan1223.wang wrote:

  Hi Frans,

Could you send the result of

$LFS_TGT-readelf -a $LFS/lib/libc.so.6 | grep ISA


  The line '$LFS_TGT-readelf -a $LFS/lib/libc.so.6 | grep ISA' returns
nothing.

You need to use readelf from binutils 2.36. If you have back up to
2.35.1, it returns nothing.

Pierre

Now recompiling with binutils-2.36 and glibc-2.33. I will later send 
the config.log from ch5 (not ch6) and tomorrow morning (UTC-1) the 
config.log from ch8.


Frans.

glibc-2.33 config.log from ch5.
Maybe later the result from readelf, otherwise tomorrow.

Frans.

This file contains any messages produced by compilers while
running configure, to aid debugging if configure makes a mistake.

It was created by GNU C Library configure (see version.h), which was
generated by GNU Autoconf 2.69.  Invocation command line was

  $ /mnt/lfs/sources-base/glibc-2.33/configure --prefix=/usr --host=x86_64-cross-linux-gnu --build=x86_64-suse-linux-gnu --enable-kernel=3.2 --with-headers=/mnt/lfs/usr/include libc_cv_slibdir=/lib

## - ##
## Platform. ##
## - ##

hostname = pws1
uname -m = x86_64
uname -r = 5.8.18-FdB-pws1
uname -s = Linux
uname -v = #2 SMP Fri Jan 29 22:05:14 CET 2021

/usr/bin/uname -p = x86_64
/bin/uname -X = unknown

/bin/arch  = x86_64
/usr/bin/arch -k   = unknown
/usr/convex/getsysinfo = unknown
/usr/bin/hostinfo  = unknown
/bin/machine   = unknown
/usr/bin/oslevel   = unknown
/bin/universe  = unknown

PATH: /mnt/lfs/crosstools/bin
PATH: /bin
PATH: /usr/bin


## --- ##
## Core tests. ##
## --- ##

configure:2213: checking build system type
configure:2227: result: x86_64-suse-linux-gnu
configure:2247: checking host system type
configure:2260: result: x86_64-cross-linux-gnu
configure:2289: checking for x86_64-cross-linux-gnu-gcc
configure:2305: found /mnt/lfs/crosstools/bin/x86_64-cross-linux-gnu-gcc
configure:2316: result: x86_64-cross-linux-gnu-gcc
configure:2585: checking for C compiler version
configure:2594: x86_64-cross-linux-gnu-gcc --version >&5
x86_64-cross-linux-gnu-gcc (GCC) 10.2.0
Copyright (C) 2020 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the source for copying conditions.  There is NO
warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

configure:2605: $? = 0
configure:2594: x86_64-cross-linux-gnu-gcc -v >&5
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=x86_64-cross-linux-gnu-gcc
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/mnt/lfs/crosstools/libexec/gcc/x86_64-cross-linux-gnu/10.2.0/lto-wrapper
Target: x86_64-cross-linux-gnu
Configured with: /mnt/lfs/sources-base/gcc-10.2.0/configure --prefix=/mnt/lfs/crosstools --target=x86_64-cross-linux-gnu --with-sysroot=/mnt/lfs --with-glibc-version=2.19 --with-newlib --without-headers --enable-initfini-array --disable-shared --disable-decimal-float --disable-libatomic --disable-libgomp --disable-libquadmath --disable-libssp --disable-libstdcxx --disable-libvtv --disable-multilib --disable-nls --disable-threads --enable-languages=c,c++
Thread model: single
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib zstd
gcc version 10.2.0 (GCC) 
configure:2605: $? = 0
configure:2594: x86_64-cross-linux-gnu-gcc -V >&5
x86_64-cross-linux-gnu-gcc: error: unrecognized command-line option '-V'
x86_64-cross-linux-gnu-gcc: fatal error: no input files
compilation terminated.
configure:2605: $? = 1
configure:2594: x86_64-cross-linux-gnu-gcc -qversion >&5
x86_64-cross-linux-gnu-gcc: error: unrecognized command-line option '-qversion'; did you mean '--version'?
x86_64-cross-linux-gnu-gcc: fatal error: no input files
compilation terminated.
configure:2605: $? = 1
configure:2610: checking for suffix of object files
configure:2632: x86_64-cross-linux-gnu-gcc -c   conftest.c >&5
configure:2636: $? = 0
configure:2657: result: o
configure:2661: checking whether we are using the GNU C compiler
configure:2680: x86_64-cross-linux-gnu-gcc -c   conftest.c >&5
configure:2680: $? = 0
configure:2689: result: yes
configure:2698: checking whether x86_64-cross-linux-gnu-gcc accepts -g
configure:2718: x86_64-cross-linux-gnu-gcc -c -g  conftest.c >&5
configure:2718: $? = 0
configure:2759: result: yes
configure:2788: checking for gcc
configure:2804: found /usr/bin/gcc
configure:2815: result: gcc
configure:2839: checking for x86_64-cross-linux-gnu-readelf
configure:2855: found /mnt/lfs/crosstools/bin/x86_64-cross-linux-gnu-readelf
configure:2866: result: x86_64-cross-linux-gnu-readelf
configure:2944: checking for x86_64-cross-linux-gnu-g++
configure:2960: found /mnt/lfs/crosstools/bin/x86_64-cross-linux-gnu-g++
configure:2971: result: x86_64-cross-linux-gnu-g++
configure:3042: checking for C++ compiler version
configure:3051: x86_64-cross-linux-gnu-

Re: [lfs-support] Compile error glibc2.33

[Frans de Boer]

On 05/02/2021 21:35, Pierre Labastie wrote:

On Fri, 2021-02-05 at 20:54 +0100, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 05/02/2021 20:16, Frans de Boer wrote:
  
  
On 05/02/2021 16:25, xry...@mengyan1223.wang wrote:
  
  
Hi Frans,


Could you send the result of

$LFS_TGT-readelf -a $LFS/lib/libc.so.6 | grep ISA


  The line '$LFS_TGT-readelf -a $LFS/lib/libc.so.6 | grep ISA' returns
nothing.

You need to use readelf from binutils 2.36. If you have back up to
2.35.1, it returns nothing.

Pierre

Now recompiling with binutils-2.36 and glibc-2.33. I will later send the 
config.log from ch5 (not ch6) and tomorrow morning (UTC-1) the 
config.log from ch8.


Frans.
--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Compile error glibc2.33

[Frans de Boer]

On 05/02/2021 20:16, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 05/02/2021 16:25, xry...@mengyan1223.wang wrote:

Hi Frans,

Could you send the result of

$LFS_TGT-readelf -a $LFS/lib/libc.so.6 | grep ISA

(in host distro)

and config.log of glibc (both ch6 and ch8)?

Sorry for bad formating (using my phone to reply)

Just started recompiling glibc 2.33 (ch8) after change to binutils 
2.35.2. Ik keep you informed using this list.


Frans
The line '$LFS_TGT-readelf -a $LFS/lib/libc.so.6 | grep ISA' returns 
nothing.


-- 
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

Re: [lfs-support] Compile error glibc2.33

[Frans de Boer]

On 05/02/2021 20:16, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 05/02/2021 16:25, xry...@mengyan1223.wang wrote:

Hi Frans,

Could you send the result of

$LFS_TGT-readelf -a $LFS/lib/libc.so.6 | grep ISA

(in host distro)

and config.log of glibc (both ch6 and ch8)?

Sorry for bad formating (using my phone to reply)

Just started recompiling glibc 2.33 (ch8) after change to binutils 
2.35.2. Ik keep you informed using this list.


Frans

Okay, I get the same message when compiling with binutils 2.35.2.
I will now restart the rebuild. In the meantime, I have already attached 
the config.log from ch8.


Frans.


This file contains any messages produced by compilers while
running configure, to aid debugging if configure makes a mistake.

It was created by GNU C Library configure (see version.h), which was
generated by GNU Autoconf 2.69.  Invocation command line was

  $ /sources-base/glibc-2.33/configure --prefix=/usr --libdir=/usr/lib --disable-werror --enable-kernel=3.2 --enable-stack-protector=strong --with-headers=/usr/include libc_cv_slibdir=/lib

## - ##
## Platform. ##
## - ##

hostname = pws1
uname -m = x86_64
uname -r = 5.8.18-FdB-pws1
uname -s = Linux
uname -v = #2 SMP Fri Jan 29 22:05:14 CET 2021

/usr/bin/uname -p = unknown
/bin/uname -X = unknown

/bin/arch  = unknown
/usr/bin/arch -k   = unknown
/usr/convex/getsysinfo = unknown
/usr/bin/hostinfo  = unknown
/bin/machine   = unknown
/usr/bin/oslevel   = unknown
/bin/universe  = unknown

PATH: /bin
PATH: /usr/bin
PATH: /sbin
PATH: /usr/sbin


## --- ##
## Core tests. ##
## --- ##

configure:2213: checking build system type
configure:2227: result: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
configure:2247: checking host system type
configure:2260: result: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
configure:2329: checking for gcc
configure:2345: found /usr/bin/gcc
configure:2356: result: gcc
configure:2585: checking for C compiler version
configure:2594: gcc --version >&5
gcc (GCC) 10.2.0
Copyright (C) 2020 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the source for copying conditions.  There is NO
warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

configure:2605: $? = 0
configure:2594: gcc -v >&5
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=gcc
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/libexec/gcc/x86_64-cross-linux-gnu/10.2.0/lto-wrapper
Target: x86_64-cross-linux-gnu
Configured with: /mnt/lfs/sources-base/gcc-10.2.0/configure --prefix=/usr --host=x86_64-cross-linux-gnu --build=x86_64-suse-linux-gnu CC_FOR_TARGET=x86_64-cross-linux-gnu-gcc --with-build-sysroot=/mnt/lfs --enable-initfine-array --enable-languages=c,c++ --disable-multilib --disable-nls --disable-decimal-float --disable-libatomic --disable-libgomp --disable-libquadmath --disable-libssp --disable-libvtv --disable-libstdcxx
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression algorithms: zlib
gcc version 10.2.0 (GCC) 
configure:2605: $? = 0
configure:2594: gcc -V >&5
gcc: error: unrecognized command-line option '-V'
gcc: fatal error: no input files
compilation terminated.
configure:2605: $? = 1
configure:2594: gcc -qversion >&5
gcc: error: unrecognized command-line option '-qversion'; did you mean '--version'?
gcc: fatal error: no input files
compilation terminated.
configure:2605: $? = 1
configure:2610: checking for suffix of object files
configure:2632: gcc -c -O2 -march=native  conftest.c >&5
configure:2636: $? = 0
configure:2657: result: o
configure:2661: checking whether we are using the GNU C compiler
configure:2680: gcc -c -O2 -march=native  conftest.c >&5
configure:2680: $? = 0
configure:2689: result: yes
configure:2698: checking whether gcc accepts -g
configure:2718: gcc -c -g  conftest.c >&5
configure:2718: $? = 0
configure:2759: result: yes
configure:2879: checking for readelf
configure:2895: found /usr/bin/readelf
configure:2906: result: readelf
configure:2988: checking for g++
configure:3004: found /usr/bin/g++
configure:3015: result: g++
configure:3042: checking for C++ compiler version
configure:3051: g++ --version >&5
g++ (GCC) 10.2.0
Copyright (C) 2020 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the source for copying conditions.  There is NO
warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

configure:3062: $? = 0
configure:3051: g++ -v >&5
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=g++
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/libexec/gcc/x86_64-cross-linux-gnu/10.2.0/lto-wrapper
Target: x86_64-cross-linux-gnu
Configured with: /mnt/lfs/sources-base/gcc-10.2.0/configure --prefix=/usr --host=x86_64-cross-linux-gnu --build=x86_64-suse-linux-gnu CC_FOR_TARGET=x86_64-cross-linux-gnu-gcc --with-build-sysroot=/mnt/lfs --enable-initfine-array --enable-languages=c,c++ --disable-multilib --disable-nls --disable-decimal-float --disable-libatomic --disable-libgomp --disable-libquadmath --disable-libssp --disable-libvtv --disable-libstdcxx
Thread model: posix
Supported LTO compression al

Re: [lfs-support] Compile error glibc2.33

[Frans de Boer]

On 05/02/2021 16:25, xry...@mengyan1223.wang wrote:

Hi Frans,

Could you send the result of

$LFS_TGT-readelf -a $LFS/lib/libc.so.6 | grep ISA

(in host distro)

and config.log of glibc (both ch6 and ch8)?

Sorry for bad formating (using my phone to reply)

Just started recompiling glibc 2.33 (ch8) after change to binutils 
2.35.2. Ik keep you informed using this list.


Frans

--
A: Yes, just like thatA: Ja, net zo
Q: Oh, Just like reading a book backwards Q: Oh, net als een boek 
achterstevoren lezen
A: Because it upsets the natural flow of a story  A: Omdat het de natuurlijke 
gang uit het verhaal haalt
Q: Why is top-posting annoying?   Q: Waarom is Top-posting zo 
irritant?

-- 
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

Re: [lfs-support] Compile error glibc2.33

[Frans de Boer]

On 05/02/2021 13:42, Ken Moffat wrote:

On Fri, Feb 05, 2021 at 12:31:56PM +0100, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 05/02/2021 12:29, Frans de Boer wrote:

After the 'file' issue, I started rebuilding LFS. Just to find out that
it stops with the message
'/lib/libc.so.6: CPU ISA level is lower than required'

I use a Phenom II X4 365, but that seems now outdated?

--- Frans


Sorry, have to add  that it was in chapter 8.


Seems to come from the HWCAPS additions (which are supposed to allow
distros to produce binaries for various groups of the x86_64
architecture (V1, V2, ...).

The tests are supposed to allow the required version to be tested (I
can't find a list of versions, but higher versions have more shinier
options).  I also can't find how to determine what version is
requested, nor what version binutils thinks the running machine is.

Your machine is from the K10 family, from a little over 10 years
ago.  I very much doubt that anyone has tried building glibc-2.33 on
anything like that.  Sounds like a bug somewhere, probably in
binutils.

I was skimming a mirror of the kernel lists and saw someone having
problems with binutils-2.36 (couldn't build 5.10 kernels). The
current bugs seems to be listed at
https://www.mail-archive.com/bug-binutils@gnu.org/
although I have not attempted to review how serious most of those
are.

The one I noted (hopefully fixed with 5.10.13) is copied there:
https://www.mail-archive.com/bug-binutils@gnu.org/msg36912.html.

I get the impression that 2.36 might be problematic.

ĸen
Okay, I will just rebuild stuff with binutils-2.35.2 and see if your 
theory sticks. Just have to wait some time.


--- Frans.

--
A: Yes, just like thatA: Ja, net zo
Q: Oh, Just like reading a book backwards Q: Oh, net als een boek 
achterstevoren lezen
A: Because it upsets the natural flow of a story  A: Omdat het de natuurlijke 
gang uit het verhaal haalt
Q: Why is top-posting annoying?   Q: Waarom is Top-posting zo 
irritant?

--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Compile error glibc2.33

[Frans de Boer]

On 05/02/2021 12:29, Frans de Boer wrote:
After the 'file' issue, I started rebuilding LFS. Just to find out 
that it stops with the message

'/lib/libc.so.6: CPU ISA level is lower than required'

I use a Phenom II X4 365, but that seems now outdated?

--- Frans


Sorry, have to add  that it was in chapter 8.

--
A: Yes, just like thatA: Ja, net zo
Q: Oh, Just like reading a book backwards Q: Oh, net als een boek 
achterstevoren lezen
A: Because it upsets the natural flow of a story  A: Omdat het de natuurlijke 
gang uit het verhaal haalt
Q: Why is top-posting annoying?   Q: Waarom is Top-posting zo 
irritant?

--
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

[lfs-support] Compile error glibc2.33

[Frans de Boer]

After the 'file' issue, I started rebuilding LFS. Just to find out that 
it stops with the message

'/lib/libc.so.6: CPU ISA level is lower than required'

I use a Phenom II X4 365, but that seems now outdated?

--- Frans

--
A: Yes, just like thatA: Ja, net zo
Q: Oh, Just like reading a book backwards Q: Oh, net als een boek 
achterstevoren lezen
A: Because it upsets the natural flow of a story  A: Omdat het de natuurlijke 
gang uit het verhaal haalt
Q: Why is top-posting annoying?   Q: Waarom is Top-posting zo 
irritant?

--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Compile file 5.39 (dev)

[Frans de Boer]

On 04/02/2021 22:19, Bruce Dubbs wrote:

On 2/4/21 2:50 PM, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 04/02/2021 21:21, Pierre Labastie wrote:

On Thu, 2021-02-04 at 20:03 +0100, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 04/02/2021 16:22, Scott Andrews wrote:

On 2/4/21 9:14 AM, Frans de Boer wrote:

The new instructions for compiling file-5.39 in the first phase,
are
incomplete. As it turns out, you can only compile file when the
configure command is augmented with '--disable-libseccomp'. The
file
$LFS/usr/include/libseccomp/seccomp.h does not exist yet, cause
to
halt compilation with the message that seccomp.h is missing.

--- Frans.


That should exist as it should have been installed in LFS-10.0
5.4.1.

BTW I am not a fan of the new "building system" as it takes
excessive
liberties about overwriting things



No, what is installed is /usr/include/seccomp.h, not the one what is
needed.

I think this need some clarification on your side: when did you get
that missing include? When compiling the first pass of file (in build),
or the second pass?

In the first pass, you depend on what is on the host, it's a "normal"
compilation on host. It may be that seccomp.h is missing on the host,
some -dev or -devel package is not installed. I've never seen that
before.

In the second pass, you depend on what is in $LFS, and yes seccomp.h is
installed in 5.4.1 (see last line of the instructions): usr/include
(no /, so relative to the kernel build dir) is copied recursively to
$LFS/usr.

Pierre



Pierre,

As stated above, it happens in the first pass.
I have on the host both /usr/include/seccomp.h and 
/usr/include/libseccomp/seccomp.h.


However, on the LFS side we only have the first one. And since the 
first pass is compiled with the LFS includes, it stands to reason 
that it actually needs the ../libseccomp/seccomp.h on the LFS side.
I did not tried to make a link as such to see if that was really the 
case. This is, because it is only a temporary creation of 'file' 
where the seccomp sandbox is of no consequence.


I am OK with the changes to omit seccomp, but when building on an LFS 
10.0 system, there were no problems before.


  -- Bruce
The only thing which is indeed different is the introduction of 
glibc-2.33, I have compiled everything before - running ahead of the LFS 
changes and using glibc-2.32 - but only glibc-2.33 brought some real 
changes and the failures around 'file'.


Nevertheless, the update solves this and only when one has enough idle 
time, it might be good to investigate further.


--- Frans

--
A: Yes, just like thatA: Ja, net zo
Q: Oh, Just like reading a book backwards Q: Oh, net als een boek 
achterstevoren lezen
A: Because it upsets the natural flow of a story  A: Omdat het de natuurlijke 
gang uit het verhaal haalt
Q: Why is top-posting annoying?   Q: Waarom is Top-posting zo 
irritant?

--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Compile file 5.39 (dev)

[Frans de Boer]

On 04/02/2021 21:21, Pierre Labastie wrote:

On Thu, 2021-02-04 at 20:03 +0100, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 04/02/2021 16:22, Scott Andrews wrote:

On 2/4/21 9:14 AM, Frans de Boer wrote:

The new instructions for compiling file-5.39 in the first phase,
are
incomplete. As it turns out, you can only compile file when the
configure command is augmented with '--disable-libseccomp'. The
file
$LFS/usr/include/libseccomp/seccomp.h does not exist yet, cause
to
halt compilation with the message that seccomp.h is missing.

--- Frans.


That should exist as it should have been installed in LFS-10.0
5.4.1.

BTW I am not a fan of the new "building system" as it takes
excessive
liberties about overwriting things



No, what is installed is /usr/include/seccomp.h, not the one what is
needed.

I think this need some clarification on your side: when did you get
that missing include? When compiling the first pass of file (in build),
or the second pass?

In the first pass, you depend on what is on the host, it's a "normal"
compilation on host. It may be that seccomp.h is missing on the host,
some -dev or -devel package is not installed. I've never seen that
before.

In the second pass, you depend on what is in $LFS, and yes seccomp.h is
installed in 5.4.1 (see last line of the instructions):  usr/include
(no /, so relative to the kernel build dir) is copied recursively to
$LFS/usr.

Pierre



Pierre,

As stated above, it happens in the first pass.
I have on the host both /usr/include/seccomp.h and 
/usr/include/libseccomp/seccomp.h.


However, on the LFS side we only have the first one. And since the first 
pass is compiled with the LFS includes, it stands to reason that it 
actually needs the ../libseccomp/seccomp.h on the LFS side.
I did not tried to make a link as such to see if that was really the 
case. This is, because it is only a temporary creation of 'file' where 
the seccomp sandbox is of no consequence.


--- Frans.

--
A: Yes, just like thatA: Ja, net zo
Q: Oh, Just like reading a book backwards Q: Oh, net als een boek 
achterstevoren lezen
A: Because it upsets the natural flow of a story  A: Omdat het de natuurlijke 
gang uit het verhaal haalt
Q: Why is top-posting annoying?   Q: Waarom is Top-posting zo 
irritant?

--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Compile file 5.39 (dev)

[Frans de Boer]

On 04/02/2021 16:22, Scott Andrews wrote:


On 2/4/21 9:14 AM, Frans de Boer wrote:
The new instructions for compiling file-5.39 in the first phase, are 
incomplete. As it turns out, you can only compile file when the 
configure command is augmented with '--disable-libseccomp'. The file 
$LFS/usr/include/libseccomp/seccomp.h does not exist yet, cause to 
halt compilation with the message that seccomp.h is missing.


--- Frans.



That should exist as it should have been installed in LFS-10.0 5.4.1.

BTW I am not a fan of the new "building system" as it takes excessive 
liberties about overwriting things




No, what is installed is /usr/include/seccomp.h, not the one what is needed.

-- Frans

--
A: Yes, just like thatA: Ja, net zo
Q: Oh, Just like reading a book backwards Q: Oh, net als een boek 
achterstevoren lezen
A: Because it upsets the natural flow of a story  A: Omdat het de natuurlijke 
gang uit het verhaal haalt
Q: Why is top-posting annoying?   Q: Waarom is Top-posting zo 
irritant?

--
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

[lfs-support] Compile file 5.39 (dev)

[Frans de Boer]

The new instructions for compiling file-5.39 in the first phase, are 
incomplete. As it turns out, you can only compile file when the 
configure command is augmented with '--disable-libseccomp'. The file 
$LFS/usr/include/libseccomp/seccomp.h does not exist yet, cause to halt 
compilation with the message that seccomp.h is missing.


--- Frans.

--

A: Yes, just like thatA: Ja, net zo
Q: Oh, Just like reading a book backwards Q: Oh, net als een boek 
achterstevoren lezen
A: Because it upsets the natural flow of a story  A: Omdat het de natuurlijke 
gang uit het verhaal haalt
Q: Why is top-posting annoying?   Q: Waarom is Top-posting zo 
irritant?

--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Problem with systemd and network.

[Frans de Boer]

On 25/01/2021 15:30, Frans de Boer wrote:

LS,

If have a problem with systemd and network. journalctl reports 
"systemd-networkd.service: Failed to determine user credentials: No 
such process"


I have searched internet but found only older references to this 
message, however, this in relation to other units.


I use the settings as given in the latest development sections.

Any suggestions?

--- Frans.


Some extra info: The LFS system is started using QEMU/KVM from an image. 
Prior to LFS 10, this worked fine. Currently not anymore. Starting LFS - 
again using QEMU/KVM - without systemd is no problem, as well as other 
VM's running Windows.


Hope to receive some pointer(s).

--- Frans.

--
A: Yes, just like thatA: Ja, net zo
Q: Oh, Just like reading a book backwards Q: Oh, net als een boek 
achterstevoren lezen
A: Because it upsets the natural flow of a story  A: Omdat het de natuurlijke 
gang uit het verhaal haalt
Q: Why is top-posting annoying?   Q: Waarom is Top-posting zo 
irritant?

--
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

[lfs-support] Problem with systemd and network.

[Frans de Boer]

LS,

If have a problem with systemd and network. journalctl reports 
"systemd-networkd.service: Failed to determine user credentials: No such 
process"


I have searched internet but found only older references to this 
message, however, this in relation to other units.


I use the settings as given in the latest development sections.

Any suggestions?

--- Frans.


--
A: Yes, just like thatA: Ja, net zo
Q: Oh, Just like reading a book backwards Q: Oh, net als een boek 
achterstevoren lezen
A: Because it upsets the natural flow of a story  A: Omdat het de natuurlijke 
gang uit het verhaal haalt
Q: Why is top-posting annoying?   Q: Waarom is Top-posting zo 
irritant?

--
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

Re: [lfs-support] IPv4 en 6

[Frans de Boer]

On 06-07-2020 17:18, Bruce Dubbs wrote:

On 7/6/20 8:57 AM, Frans de Boer wrote:
I have found messages from some years ago asking about the 
possibility of giving examples how to configure LFS for use on IPv4 
and IPv6. Now, LFS is still using the ifconfig utility including the 
ipconfig.xxx file. I found references to this utility way back in 
1983, so it looks very much outdated.
Also, finding references of what the content of ifconfig.xxx can be, 
is very hard to find. And what has been found uses a slightly 
different syntax then using under LFS.


Is it not time to switch to the use of something more up-to-date and 
thus support IPv4 and IPv6?


Most of us still need the IPv4 protocol due to not migrated 
(external) servers, but IPv6 is also increasingly needed.


We use iproute2 in LFS.  We also install ifconfig in inetutils if you 
want to use it.  When configuring your ip address we use 
/etc/sysconfig/ipconfig.IFACE, but that is only a file name.


You can use the same scripts for ipv6, but that is a bit more complex. 
See the IPv6-in-LFS hint for that.


  -- bruce


Thnx, It seems I was on my way and expected some extra work because of 
the SERVICE parameter. Now at least I have an example.


--- Frans.

--
A: Yes, just like thatA: Ja, net zo
Q: Oh, Just like reading a book backwards Q: Oh, net als een boek 
achterstevoren lezen
A: Because it upsets the natural flow of a story  A: Omdat het de natuurlijke 
gang uit het verhaal haalt
Q: Why is top-posting annoying?   Q: Waarom is Top-posting zo 
irritant?

--
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

[lfs-support] IPv4 en 6

[Frans de Boer]

I have found messages from some years ago asking about the possibility 
of giving examples how to configure LFS for use on IPv4 and IPv6. Now, 
LFS is still using the ifconfig utility including the ipconfig.xxx file. 
I found references to this utility way back in 1983, so it looks very 
much outdated.
Also, finding references of what the content of ifconfig.xxx can be, is 
very hard to find. And what has been found uses a slightly different 
syntax then using under LFS.


Is it not time to switch to the use of something more up-to-date and 
thus support IPv4 and IPv6?


Most of us still need the IPv4 protocol due to not migrated (external) 
servers, but IPv6 is also increasingly needed.


--- Frans.

--
A: Yes, just like thatA: Ja, net zo
Q: Oh, Just like reading a book backwards Q: Oh, net als een boek 
achterstevoren lezen
A: Because it upsets the natural flow of a story  A: Omdat het de natuurlijke 
gang uit het verhaal haalt
Q: Why is top-posting annoying?   Q: Waarom is Top-posting zo 
irritant?

--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Explain devel. chapter 5 and 6

[Frans de Boer]

On 2020-06-28 22:24, Scott Andrews wrote:

On Sun, 28 Jun 2020 19:41:20 +0200
Frans de Boer  wrote:


On 28-06-2020 14:07, Scott Andrews wrote:

On Sun, 28 Jun 2020 13:42:10 +0200
Frans de Boer  wrote:
  

LS,

Currently, the previous chapter 5 has been split into 3 separate
chapters. It is obvious why the new chapter 7 exists.
However, chapter 5 and 6 are a bit puzzling. There are no extra
actions between chapter 6 and 5, in fact one could argue that 5
and 6 can be fussed together.

The only reason I can think of to explain the separation between
chapter 5 and 6, is that chapter 5 provides the basic building
blocks to compile the remaining of chapter 6. Which can be reused
if (some of) chapter 6 needs a rebuild. After all, the next step
is a different architecture where this approach can be used.
That said, if the compiler or glibc is chanced, one has to rebuild
chapter 5 anyhow. Looking at the packages in chapter 6, there is
just only 2x extra time involved to compile them. Especially when
there is no testing done, as was possible under the previous
releases.

Maybe one could explain this a little deeper?
  

Sorry to high jack you thread, not my intention, only to comment on
this new warp in the space continuum.

I have looked at this "new version" way of building LFS and I
believe it will create many issues for me as someone that uses a
package manager.  I also so see no real advantage over the old
way.  I also use the overlay file system for the kernel so when
building chapter 6 (old way) only /tools is present in the "host"
file system along with all the scripts etc that I use to build LFS.
The "host" that I used to build the tool chain is completely
removed. I don't like mixing the tool chain into the root file
system ( yes I know in the old way some links are needed). I will
continue with using the old way, and I think it is time for me to
split from the LFS project and go my own way.

Sorry Scott, I see no package manager in de re-styled LFS. Just as in
the previous version, there is some talk about a package manager, but
that is it, just highlighting the differences and/or possibilities.

I use a package manager and the changes made severely impact anyone
using a package manager.  As in the new changes make using a package
manager very difficult. I see little to no benefit for the pain
induced.  I would rather go to the dentist and get 32 teeth drilled
with out Novocain than to "update" to this new process.


Don't forget that the project is to assist others in building their
own basic linux system. As the world continues, we must take into
account that different architectures will be come into demand. Using
a textbook example for cross-compiling is a start. In fact, this
layout has benefits over the previous versions in that we don't have
all kind of workarounds to build things and paves the way for future
LFS's.


My builds are for the ARM platform and I build 32 bit systems on a 64
bit platform.  This "new" version only causes me grief and at the end
of the day the product is the same.  No different just more grief.
All thou I do make some mods on host the build system is constructed
Once chroot into the "BUILD" chroot it is all by the book, until now.

Mixing /tools and the root filesystem by way of DESTDIR causes a great
amount of distruction.  The only "advantage" I see is not having to
"adjust the toolchain" at the risk of greatly enhanced way of killing
the host system

I have zero work a rounds to take version 9.0 or 9.1 and build it on
the ARM platform so I am at a loss to see your benefits.  I only need
to change the flags and add platform info and the build goes exactly to
the book.

You have even whacked the PiLFS project as they are somewhat stuck on
the devel version just prior to this "NEW" mess.  Nothing new has been
posted to their site in a while unless it just happened today.

I tried using the new enhanced version and it failed, I concluded that
the changes needing to by made and then debugging the "build" scripts
far out paced any good.

Looks like you "systemded" LFS


No need to get rude.

--
A: Yes, just like thatA: Ja, net zo
Q: Oh, Just like reading a book backwards Q: Oh, net als een boek 
achterstevoren lezen
A: Because it upsets the natural flow of a story  A: Omdat het de natuurlijke 
gang uit het verhaal haalt
Q: Why is top-posting annoying?   Q: Waarom is Top-posting zo 
irritant?

--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Explain devel. chapter 5 and 6

[Frans de Boer]

On 28-06-2020 16:36, Pierre Labastie wrote:

On Sun, 2020-06-28 at 15:43 +0200, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 28-06-2020 15:16, Pierre Labastie wrote:

On Sun, 2020-06-28 at 13:42 +0200, Frans de Boer wrote:

LS,

Currently, the previous chapter 5 has been split into 3 separate
chapters. It is obvious why the new chapter 7 exists.
However, chapter 5 and 6 are a bit puzzling. There are no extra
actions
between chapter 6 and 5, in fact one could argue that 5 and 6 can
be
fussed together.

The only reason I can think of to explain the separation between
chapter
5 and 6, is that chapter 5 provides the basic building blocks to
compile
the remaining of chapter 6. Which can be reused if (some of)
chapter
6
needs a rebuild. After all, the next step is a different
architecture
where this approach can be used.
That said, if the compiler or glibc is chanced, one has to
rebuild
chapter 5 anyhow. Looking at the packages in chapter 6, there is
just
only 2x extra time involved to compile them. Especially when
there is
no
testing done, as was possible under the previous releases.

Maybe one could explain this a little deeper?

Isn't "Toolchain technical notes" in "Important Preliminary
Material"
enough? Well, maybe not. All we have is:
"As said above, the standard C++ library is compiled next, followed
in Chapter 6 by all the programs that need themselves to be built.
The
install step of all those packages uses the DESTDIR variable to
have
the programs land into the LFS filesystem."

Maybe better would be something like this:
"As said above, the standard C++ library is compiled next, which
completes the cross-compilation toolchain. Next, in Chapter 6, all
the
programs that need themselves to be built. The install step of all
those packages uses the DESTDIR variable to have the programs land
into
the LFS filesystem."

Also, in chapter six' introduction:
"This chapter shows how to cross-compile basic utilities using the
just
built cross-toolchain".

Maybe add a sentence about impossibility for testing at the end of
"Those utilities are installed into their final location, but
cannot be
used yet"

Pierre


So, if I read above reaction correctly, the only reason for having
chapter 6 is the use of the DESTDIR variable?

Hmmm, not exactly. It's rather: chapter 5 for the cross compiler and
its libraries, chapter 6 for building basic tools using this cross-
compiler. Actually, the libraries in chapter 5 make use of DESTDIR
too...
Just as I stated. Still one might wonder why splitting. Especially with 
your comment now referring to DESTDIR being used in chapter 5 too. ;)

Sure, I understand that the tools build in chapter 5 are now used to
build programs/libraries which need to run on the target machine
itself.
The whole set of chapter 6 and 7 can be copied to the target
machine,
from where you can start building the final code with chapter 8 and
higher. This, however, needs some augmentation to the end of chapter
7
and start of chapter 8 or insert a new chapter 8 "Preparing the
target
machine".

NOTE: this can help some users who's intended target machine is a 32-
bit
x86 and their host machine is a x86_64. Just as a show case when
addressing none x86(_64) architectures in some future version.

Hmmm, we are trying to get the multilib build to work ATM. But I've
never thought of building for 32 bit on a 64 bit machine...


It's just an example. It might have said prepping for POWER or ARM 
architectures.
There was, however, recently a question of someone on the list of just 
how to build for a 32-bit machine on a 64-bit host. Apparently, that 
idea surfaced the first.





Anyhow, the presented text make things - in my view - a little more
clear for the intended audience.

Will think a little more and try to come with something even clearer
(needed in view of your understanding why chapter 6 from my first
answer :)

Pierre



--
A: Yes, just like thatA: Ja, net zo
Q: Oh, Just like reading a book backwards Q: Oh, net als een boek 
achterstevoren lezen
A: Because it upsets the natural flow of a story  A: Omdat het de natuurlijke 
gang uit het verhaal haalt
Q: Why is top-posting annoying?   Q: Waarom is Top-posting zo 
irritant?

--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Explain devel. chapter 5 and 6

[Frans de Boer]

On 28-06-2020 14:07, Scott Andrews wrote:

On Sun, 28 Jun 2020 13:42:10 +0200
Frans de Boer  wrote:


LS,

Currently, the previous chapter 5 has been split into 3 separate
chapters. It is obvious why the new chapter 7 exists.
However, chapter 5 and 6 are a bit puzzling. There are no extra
actions between chapter 6 and 5, in fact one could argue that 5 and 6
can be fussed together.

The only reason I can think of to explain the separation between
chapter 5 and 6, is that chapter 5 provides the basic building blocks
to compile the remaining of chapter 6. Which can be reused if (some
of) chapter 6 needs a rebuild. After all, the next step is a
different architecture where this approach can be used.
That said, if the compiler or glibc is chanced, one has to rebuild
chapter 5 anyhow. Looking at the packages in chapter 6, there is just
only 2x extra time involved to compile them. Especially when there is
no testing done, as was possible under the previous releases.

Maybe one could explain this a little deeper?


Sorry to high jack you thread, not my intention, only to comment on this
new warp in the space continuum.

I have looked at this "new version" way of building LFS and I believe
it will create many issues for me as someone that uses a package
manager.  I also so see no real advantage over the old way.  I also use
the overlay file system for the kernel so when building chapter 6 (old
way) only /tools is present in the "host" file system along with all the
scripts etc that I use to build LFS. The "host" that I used to build
the tool chain is completely removed. I don't like mixing the tool chain
into the root file system ( yes I know in the old way some links are
needed). I will continue with using the old way, and I think
it is time for me to split from the LFS project and go my own way.


Sorry Scott, I see no package manager in de re-styled LFS. Just as in 
the previous version, there is some talk about a package manager, but 
that is it, just highlighting the differences and/or possibilities.


Don't forget that the project is to assist others in building their own 
basic linux system. As the world continues, we must take into account 
that different architectures will be come into demand. Using a textbook 
example for cross-compiling is a start. In fact, this layout has 
benefits over the previous versions in that we don't have all kind of 
workarounds to build things and paves the way for future LFS's.


--- Frans.

--
A: Yes, just like thatA: Ja, net zo
Q: Oh, Just like reading a book backwards Q: Oh, net als een boek 
achterstevoren lezen
A: Because it upsets the natural flow of a story  A: Omdat het de natuurlijke 
gang uit het verhaal haalt
Q: Why is top-posting annoying?   Q: Waarom is Top-posting zo 
irritant?

--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Explain devel. chapter 5 and 6

[Frans de Boer]

On 28-06-2020 15:16, Pierre Labastie wrote:

On Sun, 2020-06-28 at 13:42 +0200, Frans de Boer wrote:

LS,

Currently, the previous chapter 5 has been split into 3 separate
chapters. It is obvious why the new chapter 7 exists.
However, chapter 5 and 6 are a bit puzzling. There are no extra
actions
between chapter 6 and 5, in fact one could argue that 5 and 6 can be
fussed together.

The only reason I can think of to explain the separation between
chapter
5 and 6, is that chapter 5 provides the basic building blocks to
compile
the remaining of chapter 6. Which can be reused if (some of) chapter
6
needs a rebuild. After all, the next step is a different
architecture
where this approach can be used.
That said, if the compiler or glibc is chanced, one has to rebuild
chapter 5 anyhow. Looking at the packages in chapter 6, there is
just
only 2x extra time involved to compile them. Especially when there is
no
testing done, as was possible under the previous releases.

Maybe one could explain this a little deeper?

Isn't "Toolchain technical notes" in "Important Preliminary Material"
enough? Well, maybe not. All we have is:
"As said above, the standard C++ library is compiled next, followed
in Chapter 6 by all the programs that need themselves to be built. The
install step of all those packages uses the DESTDIR variable to have
the programs land into the LFS filesystem."

Maybe better would be something like this:
"As said above, the standard C++ library is compiled next, which
completes the cross-compilation toolchain. Next, in Chapter 6, all the
programs that need themselves to be built. The install step of all
those packages uses the DESTDIR variable to have the programs land into
the LFS filesystem."

Also, in chapter six' introduction:
"This chapter shows how to cross-compile basic utilities using the just
built cross-toolchain".

Maybe add a sentence about impossibility for testing at the end of
"Those utilities are installed into their final location, but cannot be
used yet"

Pierre

So, if I read above reaction correctly, the only reason for having 
chapter 6 is the use of the DESTDIR variable?


Sure, I understand that the tools build in chapter 5 are now used to 
build programs/libraries which need to run on the target machine itself. 
The whole set of chapter 6 and 7 can be copied to the target machine, 
from where you can start building the final code with chapter 8 and 
higher. This, however, needs some augmentation to the end of chapter 7 
and start of chapter 8 or insert a new chapter 8 "Preparing the target 
machine".


NOTE: this can help some users who's intended target machine is a 32-bit 
x86 and their host machine is a x86_64. Just as a show case when 
addressing none x86(_64) architectures in some future version.


Anyhow, the presented text make things - in my view - a little more 
clear for the intended audience.


--- Frans.


--
A: Yes, just like thatA: Ja, net zo
Q: Oh, Just like reading a book backwards Q: Oh, net als een boek 
achterstevoren lezen
A: Because it upsets the natural flow of a story  A: Omdat het de natuurlijke 
gang uit het verhaal haalt
Q: Why is top-posting annoying?   Q: Waarom is Top-posting zo 
irritant?

--
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

[lfs-support] Explain devel. chapter 5 and 6

[Frans de Boer]

LS,

Currently, the previous chapter 5 has been split into 3 separate 
chapters. It is obvious why the new chapter 7 exists.
However, chapter 5 and 6 are a bit puzzling. There are no extra actions 
between chapter 6 and 5, in fact one could argue that 5 and 6 can be 
fussed together.


The only reason I can think of to explain the separation between chapter 
5 and 6, is that chapter 5 provides the basic building blocks to compile 
the remaining of chapter 6. Which can be reused if (some of) chapter 6 
needs a rebuild. After all, the next step is a different architecture 
where this approach can be used.
That said, if the compiler or glibc is chanced, one has to rebuild 
chapter 5 anyhow. Looking at the packages in chapter 6, there is just 
only 2x extra time involved to compile them. Especially when there is no 
testing done, as was possible under the previous releases.


Maybe one could explain this a little deeper?

--
A: Yes, just like thatA: Ja, net zo
Q: Oh, Just like reading a book backwards Q: Oh, net als een boek 
achterstevoren lezen
A: Because it upsets the natural flow of a story  A: Omdat het de natuurlijke 
gang uit het verhaal haalt
Q: Why is top-posting annoying?   Q: Waarom is Top-posting zo 
irritant?

--
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

Re: [lfs-support] iostream.h missing (dev v10) (SOLVED)

[Frans de Boer]

On 2020-06-22 20:02, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 2020-06-22 14:54, Xi Ruoyao wrote:

echo "#include  | x86_64-cross-linux-gnu-g++ -E -x c++ -


Result:

# 1 ""
# 1 ""
# 1 ""
# 1 "/mnt/lfs/usr/include/stdc-predef.h" 1 3 4
# 1 "" 2
# 1 ""
:1:10: fatal error: iostream: No such file or directory
compilation terminated.

--- Frans

I have checked and checked some more times and always overlooked this 
when configuring ncurses:

--with-gxx-include-dir=$LFS/tools/$LFS_TGT/include/c++/10.1.0

I should have left '$LFS' out of it.

Sorry for the trouble, I should have known better after all these years.

--
A: Yes, just like thatA: Ja, net zo
Q: Oh, Just like reading a book backwards Q: Oh, net als een boek 
achterstevoren lezen
A: Because it upsets the natural flow of a story  A: Omdat het de natuurlijke 
gang uit het verhaal haalt
Q: Why is top-posting annoying?   Q: Waarom is Top-posting zo 
irritant?

-- 
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

Re: [lfs-support] iostream.h missing (dev v10)

[Frans de Boer]

On 2020-06-22 14:54, Xi Ruoyao wrote:

echo "#include  | x86_64-cross-linux-gnu-g++ -E -x c++ -


Result:

# 1 ""
# 1 ""
# 1 ""
# 1 "/mnt/lfs/usr/include/stdc-predef.h" 1 3 4
# 1 "" 2
# 1 ""
:1:10: fatal error: iostream: No such file or directory
compilation terminated.

--- Frans

--
A: Yes, just like thatA: Ja, net zo
Q: Oh, Just like reading a book backwards Q: Oh, net als een boek 
achterstevoren lezen
A: Because it upsets the natural flow of a story  A: Omdat het de natuurlijke 
gang uit het verhaal haalt
Q: Why is top-posting annoying?   Q: Waarom is Top-posting zo 
irritant?

--
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

[lfs-support] iostream.h missing (dev v10)

[Frans de Boer]

LS,

Next issue, while compiling ncurses-6.2 i get the next message:

x86_64-cross-linux-gnu-g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I../c++ -I. -I../include 
-D_DEFAULT_SOURCE -D_XOPEN_SOURCE=600 -DNDEBUG -O2 -fPIC -c 
../c++/cursesf.cc -o ../obj_s/cursesf.o

In file included from ../c++/cursesw.h:41,
 from ../c++/cursesp.h:40,
 from ../c++/cursesf.h:40,
 from ../c++/cursesf.cc:36:
../c++/etip.h:342:15: fatal error: iostream.h: No such file or directory
  342 | # include 
  |   ^~~~
compilation terminated.

---

I can't find 'iostream.h' anywhere on my system. However, the file 
'iostream' is present on the host as well in the temporary file system.


I could compile ncurses-6.2 before this development version.

--- Frans.

--
A: Yes, just like thatA: Ja, net zo
Q: Oh, Just like reading a book backwards Q: Oh, net als een boek 
achterstevoren lezen
A: Because it upsets the natural flow of a story  A: Omdat het de natuurlijke 
gang uit het verhaal haalt
Q: Why is top-posting annoying?   Q: Waarom is Top-posting zo 
irritant?

--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Development (v10) LFS SOLVED

[Frans de Boer]

On 20-06-2020 20:50, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 20-06-2020 20:43, Xi Ruoyao wrote:

On 2020-06-20 20:10 +0200, Frans de Boer wrote:

Looking at the config.log, I see that libc_cv_slibdir is set to /lib.
However, libdir is automatically set to /lib64. I did specified in the
past this --libdir, so there was no problem - most likely because lib64
was just a link to lib.
I tried again with adding --libdir=/lib too, instead of assuming that
things work automatically. To no avail.

The only thing what is placed under /usr/lib is the directory getconf.

I attached the config.log file. Maybe have to include it textually if
the attachment is not accepted.
configure:2009: loading site script 
/usr/share/site/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
I think it's the smoking gun!  If I read the configure script 
correctly it seems
environment variable CONFIG_SITE is set to this file. But shouldn't 
it be

cleared by /home/lfs/.bash_profile?  Well it could be set again by
/etc/bash.bashrc, in some distros.  Pity.

We've discussed this in Nov. 2019:
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/pipermail/lfs-support/2019-November/053270.html 



Frans could you verify or dismiss my theory?  Simply use a "echo 
$CONFIG_SITE".
I assume your host distro is OpenSUSE (by searching the kernel 
version string)

and I'll investigate it a little.


Yes, that is the problem. If I do su - lfs, $CONFIG_SITE is still 
retained.

I now use the 'new' Leap 15.2 - which uses some very old core software.

I'll try again under Tumbleweed and come back to you within the hour.

 Frans.

Under Tumbleweed the same. But I have now created .bash_profile for user 
lfs. Something I have never done in all those years :(


All those years I expected an empty environment when doing su - lfs. Not 
so in this case.


Mea Culpa.

--- Frans.


--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Development (v10) LFS

[Frans de Boer]

On 20-06-2020 20:43, Xi Ruoyao wrote:

On 2020-06-20 20:10 +0200, Frans de Boer wrote:

Looking at the config.log, I see that libc_cv_slibdir is set to /lib.
However, libdir is automatically set to /lib64. I did specified in the
past this --libdir, so there was no problem - most likely because lib64
was just a link to lib.
I tried again with adding --libdir=/lib too, instead of assuming that
things work automatically. To no avail.

The only thing what is placed under /usr/lib is the directory getconf.

I attached the config.log file. Maybe have to include it textually if
the attachment is not accepted.
configure:2009: loading site script /usr/share/site/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu

I think it's the smoking gun!  If I read the configure script correctly it seems
environment variable CONFIG_SITE is set to this file. But shouldn't it be
cleared by /home/lfs/.bash_profile?  Well it could be set again by
/etc/bash.bashrc, in some distros.  Pity.

We've discussed this in Nov. 2019:
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/pipermail/lfs-support/2019-November/053270.html

Frans could you verify or dismiss my theory?  Simply use a "echo $CONFIG_SITE".
I assume your host distro is OpenSUSE (by searching the kernel version string)
and I'll investigate it a little.


Yes, that is the problem. If I do su - lfs, $CONFIG_SITE is still retained.
I now use the 'new' Leap 15.2 - which uses some very old core software.

I'll try again under Tumbleweed and come back to you within the hour.

 Frans.

--
A: Yes, just like thatA: Ja, net zo
Q: Oh, Just like reading a book backwards Q: Oh, net als een boek 
achterstevoren lezen
A: Because it upsets the natural flow of a story  A: Omdat het de natuurlijke 
gang uit het verhaal haalt
Q: Why is top-posting annoying?   Q: Waarom is Top-posting zo 
irritant?

--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Development (v10) LFS

[Frans de Boer]

On 20-06-2020 14:36, Pierre Labastie wrote:

On Sat, 2020-06-20 at 14:20 +0200, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 20-06-2020 13:12, Xi Ruoyao wrote:

On 2020-06-20 13:02 +0200, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 19-06-2020 22:33, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 19-06-2020 22:15, Pierre Labastie wrote:

On Fri, 2020-06-19 at 21:13 +0200, Frans de Boer wrote:

Dear all,

I follow every step but always stumble on the '$LFS_TGT-gcc
dummy.c'
-
in the first glibc.c section - in that crti.o can't be
located by ld.
Looking for crti.o, I find it residing in the
$LFS/usr/lib64
directory.

That's the weird thing, /usr/lib64 shouldn't exist. It's the
setting of
libc_cv_slibdir, which prevents that.


So, why can't ld find it?

gcc has been told (with the "case" instruction) to ask ld to
look into
/usr/lib, not /usr/lib64.

Pierre


I will check if the sed was successful.

--- Frans.


I checked and the result of the sed was as expected. Only glibc
creates
the usr/lib64 directory.

In the past the /usr/lib64 directory was a link to /usr/lib.
Also, due
to experimenting, I also found in the past that for some
adaptations I
needed to execute next for glibc:

# When going for a specific architecture, change some literals
/lib into
/lib64 or /lib32
#
if [[ ilibType -eq elibTYPE_LIB && $bldTARCH == "x86_64" ]]; then
#
# Change literal /lib64 into /lib with no architecture depended
directories
 sed -r -i -e 's@(/lib)64(/ld-linux)@\1\2@'
./sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/x86_64/ldconfig.h
 sed-i -e 's@6, "/lib64", 6@4, "/lib", 4@' \
   -e 's@len >= 6 \&\& ! memcmp @len >= 4 \&\& !
memcmp @'
./sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/x86_64/dl-cache.h
 sed -r -i -e 's@(lib)64@\1@g'
./sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/x86_64{,/64}/configure{,.ac}
#  sed-i -e 's@die "ldd execution failed" if $?;@# &@'
./scripts/test-installation.pl
 sed -r -i -e 's@(RTLDLIST=.*\\2)64@\1@'
./sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/x86_64/ldd-rewrite.sed
fi
---

The above (maybe somewhat dated) is an example when NOT having
the
/usr/lib64 directory, either as link or directory. So, it is
clear - so
it seems - that we need some more tuning, or revert to having
/usr/lib64
as just a link.

I don't think so.

The code automatically choose "${exec_prefix}/lib64" is in glibc-
2.31/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/x86_64/64/configure.  It's very clear
that if
"libc_cv_slibdir" is explicitly set, the code won't be executed.

So I believe you forgot to set "libc_cv_slibdir=/lib", maybe by a
typo (like
"libc_cv_libdir=/lib").


Suggestions?

Nope, here a partial copy:
.
--with-headers=$LFS/usr/include \
libc_cv_slibdir=/lib


The only thing I can tell you is that I have built lfs with the new
"cross" approach zillion times (for testing) using commands exactly as
they are written, and the /usr/lib64 dir has never been created.

Maybe look at config.log (or post it) to see where the issue comes from
in your build.

Pierre

Looking at the config.log, I see that libc_cv_slibdir is set to /lib. 
However, libdir is automatically set to /lib64. I did specified in the 
past this --libdir, so there was no problem - most likely because lib64 
was just a link to lib.
I tried again with adding --libdir=/lib too, instead of assuming that 
things work automatically. To no avail.


The only thing what is placed under /usr/lib is the directory getconf.

I attached the config.log file. Maybe have to include it textually if 
the attachment is not accepted.


-- Frans

--
A: Yes, just like thatA: Ja, net zo
Q: Oh, Just like reading a book backwards Q: Oh, net als een boek 
achterstevoren lezen
A: Because it upsets the natural flow of a story  A: Omdat het de natuurlijke 
gang uit het verhaal haalt
Q: Why is top-posting annoying?   Q: Waarom is Top-posting zo 
irritant?

This file contains any messages produced by compilers while
running configure, to aid debugging if configure makes a mistake.

It was created by GNU C Library configure (see version.h), which was
generated by GNU Autoconf 2.69.  Invocation command line was

  $ /mnt/lfs/sources-base/glibc-2.31/configure --prefix=/usr --host=x86_64-cross-linux --build=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu --enable-kernel=3.2 --with-headers=/mnt/lfs/usr/include libc_cv_slibdir=/lib

## - ##
## Platform. ##
## - ##

hostname = pws1
uname -m = x86_64
uname -r = 5.3.18-lp152.19-default
uname -s = Linux
uname -v = #1 SMP Tue Jun 9 20:59:24 UTC 2020 (960cb00)

/usr/bin/uname -p = x86_64
/bin/uname -X = unknown

/bin/arch  = x86_64
/usr/bin/arch -k   = unknown
/usr/convex/getsysinfo = unknown
/usr/bin/hostinfo  = unknown
/bin/machine   = unknown
/usr/bin/oslevel   = unknown
/bin/universe  = unknown

PATH: /mnt/lfs/crosstools/bin
PATH: /bin
PATH: /usr/bin


## --- ##
## Core tests. ##
## --- ##

configure:2009: loading site s

Re: [lfs-support] Development (v10) LFS

[Frans de Boer]

On 20-06-2020 13:12, Xi Ruoyao wrote:

On 2020-06-20 13:02 +0200, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 19-06-2020 22:33, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 19-06-2020 22:15, Pierre Labastie wrote:

On Fri, 2020-06-19 at 21:13 +0200, Frans de Boer wrote:

Dear all,

I follow every step but always stumble on the '$LFS_TGT-gcc dummy.c'
-
in the first glibc.c section - in that crti.o can't be located by ld.
Looking for crti.o, I find it residing in the $LFS/usr/lib64
directory.

That's the weird thing, /usr/lib64 shouldn't exist. It's the setting of
libc_cv_slibdir, which prevents that.


So, why can't ld find it?

gcc has been told (with the "case" instruction) to ask ld to look into
/usr/lib, not /usr/lib64.

Pierre


I will check if the sed was successful.

--- Frans.


I checked and the result of the sed was as expected. Only glibc creates
the usr/lib64 directory.

In the past the /usr/lib64 directory was a link to /usr/lib. Also, due
to experimenting, I also found in the past that for some adaptations I
needed to execute next for glibc:

# When going for a specific architecture, change some literals /lib into
/lib64 or /lib32
#
if [[ ilibType -eq elibTYPE_LIB && $bldTARCH == "x86_64" ]]; then
#
# Change literal /lib64 into /lib with no architecture depended directories
sed -r -i -e 's@(/lib)64(/ld-linux)@\1\2@'
./sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/x86_64/ldconfig.h
sed-i -e 's@6, "/lib64", 6@4, "/lib", 4@' \
  -e 's@len >= 6 \&\& ! memcmp @len >= 4 \&\& ! memcmp @'
./sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/x86_64/dl-cache.h
sed -r -i -e 's@(lib)64@\1@g'
./sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/x86_64{,/64}/configure{,.ac}
#  sed-i -e 's@die "ldd execution failed" if $?;@# &@'
./scripts/test-installation.pl
sed -r -i -e 's@(RTLDLIST=.*\\2)64@\1@'
./sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/x86_64/ldd-rewrite.sed
fi
---

The above (maybe somewhat dated) is an example when NOT having the
/usr/lib64 directory, either as link or directory. So, it is clear - so
it seems - that we need some more tuning, or revert to having /usr/lib64
as just a link.

I don't think so.

The code automatically choose "${exec_prefix}/lib64" is in glibc-
2.31/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/x86_64/64/configure.  It's very clear that if
"libc_cv_slibdir" is explicitly set, the code won't be executed.

So I believe you forgot to set "libc_cv_slibdir=/lib", maybe by a typo (like
"libc_cv_libdir=/lib").


Suggestions?


Nope, here a partial copy:
.
  --with-headers=$LFS/usr/include \
  libc_cv_slibdir=/lib

--- Frans

--
A: Yes, just like thatA: Ja, net zo
Q: Oh, Just like reading a book backwards Q: Oh, net als een boek 
achterstevoren lezen
A: Because it upsets the natural flow of a story  A: Omdat het de natuurlijke 
gang uit het verhaal haalt
Q: Why is top-posting annoying?   Q: Waarom is Top-posting zo 
irritant?

--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Development (v10) LFS

[Frans de Boer]

On 19-06-2020 22:33, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 19-06-2020 22:15, Pierre Labastie wrote:

On Fri, 2020-06-19 at 21:13 +0200, Frans de Boer wrote:

Dear all,

I follow every step but always stumble on the '$LFS_TGT-gcc dummy.c'
-
in the first glibc.c section - in that crti.o can't be located by ld.
Looking for crti.o, I find it residing in the $LFS/usr/lib64
directory.

That's the weird thing, /usr/lib64 shouldn't exist. It's the setting of
libc_cv_slibdir, which prevents that.


So, why can't ld find it?

gcc has been told (with the "case" instruction) to ask ld to look into
/usr/lib, not /usr/lib64.

Pierre


I will check if the sed was successful.

--- Frans.

I checked and the result of the sed was as expected. Only glibc creates 
the usr/lib64 directory.


In the past the /usr/lib64 directory was a link to /usr/lib. Also, due 
to experimenting, I also found in the past that for some adaptations I 
needed to execute next for glibc:


# When going for a specific architecture, change some literals /lib into 
/lib64 or /lib32

#
if [[ ilibType -eq elibTYPE_LIB && $bldTARCH == "x86_64" ]]; then
#
# Change literal /lib64 into /lib with no architecture depended directories
  sed -r -i -e 's@(/lib)64(/ld-linux)@\1\2@' 
./sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/x86_64/ldconfig.h

  sed    -i -e 's@6, "/lib64", 6@4, "/lib", 4@' \
    -e 's@len >= 6 \&\& ! memcmp @len >= 4 \&\& ! memcmp @' 
./sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/x86_64/dl-cache.h
  sed -r -i -e 's@(lib)64@\1@g' 
./sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/x86_64{,/64}/configure{,.ac}
#  sed    -i -e 's@die "ldd execution failed" if $?;@# &@' 
./scripts/test-installation.pl
  sed -r -i -e 's@(RTLDLIST=.*\\2)64@\1@' 
./sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/x86_64/ldd-rewrite.sed

fi
---

The above (maybe somewhat dated) is an example when NOT having the 
/usr/lib64 directory, either as link or directory. So, it is clear - so 
it seems - that we need some more tuning, or revert to having /usr/lib64 
as just a link.


Suggestions?

 Frans.

--
A: Yes, just like thatA: Ja, net zo
Q: Oh, Just like reading a book backwards Q: Oh, net als een boek 
achterstevoren lezen
A: Because it upsets the natural flow of a story  A: Omdat het de natuurlijke 
gang uit het verhaal haalt
Q: Why is top-posting annoying?   Q: Waarom is Top-posting zo 
irritant?

--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Development (v10) LFS

[Frans de Boer]

On 19-06-2020 22:15, Pierre Labastie wrote:

On Fri, 2020-06-19 at 21:13 +0200, Frans de Boer wrote:

Dear all,

I follow every step but always stumble on the '$LFS_TGT-gcc dummy.c'
-
in the first glibc.c section - in that crti.o can't be located by ld.
Looking for crti.o, I find it residing in the $LFS/usr/lib64
directory.

That's the weird thing, /usr/lib64 shouldn't exist. It's the setting of
libc_cv_slibdir, which prevents that.


So, why can't ld find it?

gcc has been told (with the "case" instruction) to ask ld to look into
/usr/lib, not /usr/lib64.

Pierre


I will check if the sed was successful.

--- Frans.

--
A: Yes, just like thatA: Ja, net zo
Q: Oh, Just like reading a book backwards Q: Oh, net als een boek 
achterstevoren lezen
A: Because it upsets the natural flow of a story  A: Omdat het de natuurlijke 
gang uit het verhaal haalt
Q: Why is top-posting annoying?   Q: Waarom is Top-posting zo 
irritant?

--
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

[lfs-support] Development (v10) LFS

[Frans de Boer]

Dear all,

I follow every step but always stumble on the '$LFS_TGT-gcc dummy.c' - 
in the first glibc.c section - in that crti.o can't be located by ld.
Looking for crti.o, I find it residing in the $LFS/usr/lib64 directory. 
So, why can't ld find it?


--- Frans.

--
A: Yes, just like thatA: Ja, net zo
Q: Oh, Just like reading a book backwards Q: Oh, net als een boek 
achterstevoren lezen
A: Because it upsets the natural flow of a story  A: Omdat het de natuurlijke 
gang uit het verhaal haalt
Q: Why is top-posting annoying?   Q: Waarom is Top-posting zo 
irritant?

--
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

Re: [lfs-support] DEV: Text and code do not match

[Frans de Boer]

On 29-05-2020 22:39, Flareon Zulu wrote:



On Fri, May 29, 2020, 14:37 Frans de Boer <mailto:fr...@fransdb.nl>> wrote:


On 29-05-2020 21:09, Flareon Zulu wrote:



On Fri, May 29, 2020, 13:03 Frans de Boer mailto:fr...@fransdb.nl>> wrote:

On 29-05-2020 16:34, Xi Ruoyao wrote:

On 2020-05-29 16:20 +0200, Pierre Labastie wrote:

On Fri, 2020-05-29 at 15:45 +0200, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 29-05-2020 14:33, Pierre Labastie wrote:

On Fri, 2020-05-29 at 13:34 +0200, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 28-05-2020 15:08, Pierre Labastie wrote:

On Thu, 2020-05-28 at 14:16 +0200, Frans de Boer wrote:

LS,

Pierre has described a change "Add a symlink from
/tools/share/locale
to
/usr/share/locale/locale-archive, ..."

The code refers to .../lib/locale and /usr/lib/locale is not
created
in 6.5.


Ooops: will fix this ASAP.

Note that the target of a symlink needs not exist when the
symlink
is
created. This one will be created (when building glibc) before
it
is
used (for bison and man-db tests)...

Pierre


Ok, now adjust the text under the heading "Prupose of each link".


It already has ../lib/.. What else do you want? I do not think the
explanation about the non existing target of the link is needed. If
we
start explaining in details each unix command, the book will be
triple
in volume...


Also, when is "/usr/lib/locale/locale-archive" created? It's not
created
in the glibc section.

It is. See localedef(1).

Pierre


It's not what I want, but the text under the indicated heading is
(still) not correct. Sorry, it seems that somethings where written in
a
hurry.

And no, I don't need an explanation how link (ln) is working. The
thing
is that the "locale-archive" is NOT created. Have not seen it
anywhere
else also. The only thing that is created additionally is the text
file
"locale-alias".

I already told you it _is_ created!!! Type "man localedef" and search
"locale-archive"...

For me, the text tells exactly what happens when building the book:
- some programs built in chap 5 look for locale information in
/tools/lib/locale/locale-archive
- the locale information added after building glibc goes into
/usr/lib/locale/locale-archive
- the link allows those chap 5 programs to find locale information
where it is.

Maybe the text is too terse, so tell me what you'd like me to add.
Maybe also, since I'm not an English native speaker, I have an error in
syntax or word use. I'll be glad to fix it, but I need to be pointed to
it.

Maybe it should be "the symlink *will* allow those programs to use the 
locales,
once they are installed in Chapter 6"?


Regards

Pierre


Found it. Remember I could not find the locale-archive file?
It is not created when one specifies the /outputpath/ with a
full path using slashes. In my scripts I specify the
outputpath due to local needs. So, I now strip the
'/locale-archive' from the link command.

--- Frans

-- 
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


And this required you to argue with one of the top developers on
this project? I personally think you should apologize, but that's
on you.

Flareon Zulu




Sorry, but because it is top developer I should refrain from any
comment? In what world are you living?

Frans

-- 
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


The world of "be polite to everyone and don't start arguments." If you 
just want arguments, you are in the wrong field.


Flareon



My last post on this: you are perfect? I started this thread to point 
out som

Re: [lfs-support] DEV: Text and code do not match

[Frans de Boer]

On 29-05-2020 21:09, Flareon Zulu wrote:



On Fri, May 29, 2020, 13:03 Frans de Boer <mailto:fr...@fransdb.nl>> wrote:


On 29-05-2020 16:34, Xi Ruoyao wrote:

On 2020-05-29 16:20 +0200, Pierre Labastie wrote:

On Fri, 2020-05-29 at 15:45 +0200, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 29-05-2020 14:33, Pierre Labastie wrote:

On Fri, 2020-05-29 at 13:34 +0200, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 28-05-2020 15:08, Pierre Labastie wrote:

On Thu, 2020-05-28 at 14:16 +0200, Frans de Boer wrote:

LS,

Pierre has described a change "Add a symlink from
/tools/share/locale
to
/usr/share/locale/locale-archive, ..."

The code refers to .../lib/locale and /usr/lib/locale is not
created
in 6.5.


Ooops: will fix this ASAP.

Note that the target of a symlink needs not exist when the
symlink
is
created. This one will be created (when building glibc) before
it
is
used (for bison and man-db tests)...

Pierre


Ok, now adjust the text under the heading "Prupose of each link".


It already has ../lib/.. What else do you want? I do not think the
explanation about the non existing target of the link is needed. If
we
start explaining in details each unix command, the book will be
triple
in volume...


Also, when is "/usr/lib/locale/locale-archive" created? It's not
created
in the glibc section.

It is. See localedef(1).

Pierre


It's not what I want, but the text under the indicated heading is
(still) not correct. Sorry, it seems that somethings where written in
a
hurry.

And no, I don't need an explanation how link (ln) is working. The
thing
is that the "locale-archive" is NOT created. Have not seen it
anywhere
else also. The only thing that is created additionally is the text
file
"locale-alias".

I already told you it _is_ created!!! Type "man localedef" and search
"locale-archive"...

For me, the text tells exactly what happens when building the book:
- some programs built in chap 5 look for locale information in
/tools/lib/locale/locale-archive
- the locale information added after building glibc goes into
/usr/lib/locale/locale-archive
- the link allows those chap 5 programs to find locale information
where it is.

Maybe the text is too terse, so tell me what you'd like me to add.
Maybe also, since I'm not an English native speaker, I have an error in
syntax or word use. I'll be glad to fix it, but I need to be pointed to
it.

Maybe it should be "the symlink *will* allow those programs to use the 
locales,
once they are installed in Chapter 6"?


Regards

Pierre


Found it. Remember I could not find the locale-archive file? It is
not created when one specifies the /outputpath/ with a full path
using slashes. In my scripts I specify the outputpath due to local
needs. So, I now strip the '/locale-archive' from the link command.

--- Frans

-- 
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


And this required you to argue with one of the top developers on this 
project? I personally think you should apologize, but that's on you.


Flareon Zulu



Sorry, but because it is top developer I should refrain from any 
comment? In what world are you living?


Frans

-- 
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

Re: [lfs-support] DEV: Text and code do not match

[Frans de Boer]

On 29-05-2020 16:34, Xi Ruoyao wrote:

On 2020-05-29 16:20 +0200, Pierre Labastie wrote:

On Fri, 2020-05-29 at 15:45 +0200, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 29-05-2020 14:33, Pierre Labastie wrote:

On Fri, 2020-05-29 at 13:34 +0200, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 28-05-2020 15:08, Pierre Labastie wrote:

On Thu, 2020-05-28 at 14:16 +0200, Frans de Boer wrote:

LS,

Pierre has described a change "Add a symlink from
/tools/share/locale
to
/usr/share/locale/locale-archive, ..."

The code refers to .../lib/locale and /usr/lib/locale is not
created
in 6.5.


Ooops: will fix this ASAP.

Note that the target of a symlink needs not exist when the
symlink
is
created. This one will be created (when building glibc) before
it
is
used (for bison and man-db tests)...

Pierre


Ok, now adjust the text under the heading "Prupose of each link".


It already has ../lib/.. What else do you want? I do not think the
explanation about the non existing target of the link is needed. If
we
start explaining in details each unix command, the book will be
triple
in volume...


Also, when is "/usr/lib/locale/locale-archive" created? It's not
created
in the glibc section.

It is. See localedef(1).

Pierre


It's not what I want, but the text under the indicated heading is
(still) not correct. Sorry, it seems that somethings where written in
a
hurry.

And no, I don't need an explanation how link (ln) is working. The
thing
is that the "locale-archive" is NOT created. Have not seen it
anywhere
else also. The only thing that is created additionally is the text
file
"locale-alias".

I already told you it _is_ created!!! Type "man localedef" and search
"locale-archive"...

For me, the text tells exactly what happens when building the book:
- some programs built in chap 5 look for locale information in
/tools/lib/locale/locale-archive
- the locale information added after building glibc goes into
/usr/lib/locale/locale-archive
- the link allows those chap 5 programs to find locale information
where it is.

Maybe the text is too terse, so tell me what you'd like me to add.
Maybe also, since I'm not an English native speaker, I have an error in
syntax or word use. I'll be glad to fix it, but I need to be pointed to
it.

Maybe it should be "the symlink *will* allow those programs to use the locales,
once they are installed in Chapter 6"?


Regards

Pierre

Found it. Remember I could not find the locale-archive file? It is not 
created when one specifies the /outputpath/ with a full path using 
slashes. In my scripts I specify the outputpath due to local needs. So, 
I now strip the '/locale-archive' from the link command.


--- Frans

-- 
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

Re: [lfs-support] DEV: Text and code do not match

[Frans de Boer]

On 29-05-2020 14:33, Pierre Labastie wrote:

On Fri, 2020-05-29 at 13:34 +0200, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 28-05-2020 15:08, Pierre Labastie wrote:

On Thu, 2020-05-28 at 14:16 +0200, Frans de Boer wrote:

LS,

Pierre has described a change "Add a symlink from
/tools/share/locale
to
/usr/share/locale/locale-archive, ..."

The code refers to .../lib/locale and /usr/lib/locale is not
created
in 6.5.


Ooops: will fix this ASAP.

Note that the target of a symlink needs not exist when the symlink
is
created. This one will be created (when building glibc) before it
is
used (for bison and man-db tests)...

Pierre


Ok, now adjust the text under the heading "Prupose of each link".


It already has ../lib/.. What else do you want? I do not think the
explanation about the non existing target of the link is needed. If we
start explaining in details each unix command, the book will be triple
in volume...


Also, when is "/usr/lib/locale/locale-archive" created? It's not
created
in the glibc section.

It is. See localedef(1).

Pierre

It's not what I want, but the text under the indicated heading is 
(still) not correct. Sorry, it seems that somethings where written in a 
hurry.


And no, I don't need an explanation how link (ln) is working. The thing 
is that the "locale-archive" is NOT created. Have not seen it anywhere 
else also. The only thing that is created additionally is the text file 
"locale-alias".


--- Frans.

--
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

Re: [lfs-support] DEV: Text and code do not match

[Frans de Boer]

On 28-05-2020 15:08, Pierre Labastie wrote:

On Thu, 2020-05-28 at 14:16 +0200, Frans de Boer wrote:

LS,

Pierre has described a change "Add a symlink from /tools/share/locale
to
/usr/share/locale/locale-archive, ..."

The code refers to .../lib/locale and /usr/lib/locale is not created
in 6.5.


Ooops: will fix this ASAP.

Note that the target of a symlink needs not exist when the symlink is
created. This one will be created (when building glibc) before it is
used (for bison and man-db tests)...

Pierre


Ok, now adjust the text under the heading "Prupose of each link".

Also, when is "/usr/lib/locale/locale-archive" created? It's not created 
in the glibc section.


--- Frans.

--
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

[lfs-support] DEV: Text and code do not match

[Frans de Boer]

LS,

Pierre has described a change "Add a symlink from /tools/share/locale to 
/usr/share/locale/locale-archive, ..."


The code refers to .../lib/locale and /usr/lib/locale is not created in 6.5.

Frans.

--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Potential damage of $LFS/tools setting in section 4.2 and 4.3 of LFS book.

[Frans de Boer]

On 19-03-19 10:19, Michael Shell wrote:

On Tue, 19 Mar 2019 09:15:25 +0100
thomas  wrote:


Renaming /tools to another name will be appropriate to come over this
issue.


Perhaps a more functionally descriptive name would also help in other
ways. After all, the stuff in /tools is for a *temporary* LFS system,
a first stage of the LFS build process.

So, perhaps a dir name such as "lfs_stage1" or "lfs_tmp_toolchain" would
not only avoid the Debian namespace collision, but also would be more
educational, potentially less confusing to the newbie, and functionally
descriptive as well.


  Just my $0.02,

  Mike Shell

I already use for years now the link name 'lfs'. I build script files 
and use a common include which contains the current link name. Easy when 
I change the link name again, I only have to change it in the common 
include file once.


My 0,01 Euro cents ;)

Frans.

--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Boot freezes - SOLVED

[Frans de Boer]

On 9/28/18 5:50 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:

On 09/28/2018 02:16 AM, Pierre Labastie wrote:

On 9/28/18 6:48 AM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:

On 09/27/2018 05:07 PM, Ken Moffat wrote:

On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 10:37:09PM +0200, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 9/27/18 10:01 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Ken and Bruce,

I suspected it has to do something with entropy, so I used 4.9.88 
- 4.9.2
dit not compiled - and the result was the same. So, since 4.9.88 
is from
somewhere in March I assume that there is no provision yet for the 
spectre

etc. issue.



4.9 ?  Really ?  Rather you than me, I will be surprised if it works
with gcc-8.2.

And yes, of course I did "modules_install", the modules are 
installed and
the initramfs is generated properly too. Until August all worked 
well, but

after August it did not anymore.



We seem to be at cross purposes.  You said you were using the
development book, now you mention an initramfs so clearly you have
at least something from BLFS.  So, specifying the version(s) of the
books might be relevant.  I've only booted (sysv) later than 8.3 on
two systems, one with 4.14.71, the other with 4.18.9, using
LFS-20180920 and BLFS-20180915 with occasional newer versions,
and neither have the entropy problem.

BUT: with 4.18.x and your delay of 12 seconds - What boot messages
(sysv) follow after that 12 second delay (and yes, just a summary of
WHICH bootscript runs after the delay - I know what it is like trying
to write down the messages once the bootscripts are running.)


cat /var/log/boot.log



Is it created if /sbin/init is not called?


No, it is not, but the discussion above asks about 'WHICH bootscript' 
and I was replying to that.


I agree that the original problem was kernel configuration that caused 
a failure before /sbin/init is called.


  -- Bruce

Before sleeping, it struck me: it's QEMU version 3.0 causing this 
problem. It seems that this version is allergic to the '-cpu host' 
argument. Once I removed that, it worked fine!. I had changed this in 
most scripts, but not yet the script to start LFS/BLFS.


I apologize to all to bother you with a problem I knew how to solve 
beforehand.


Until the next /real/ issue,
Frans.

-- 
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

Re: [lfs-support] Boot freezes

[Frans de Boer]

On 9/28/18 9:16 AM, Pierre Labastie wrote:

On 9/28/18 6:48 AM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:

On 09/27/2018 05:07 PM, Ken Moffat wrote:

On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 10:37:09PM +0200, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 9/27/18 10:01 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Ken and Bruce,

I suspected it has to do something with entropy, so I used 4.9.88 - 4.9.2
dit not compiled - and the result was the same. So, since 4.9.88 is from
somewhere in March I assume that there is no provision yet for the spectre
etc. issue.


4.9 ?  Really ?  Rather you than me, I will be surprised if it works
with gcc-8.2.


And yes, of course I did "modules_install", the modules are installed and
the initramfs is generated properly too. Until August all worked well, but
after August it did not anymore.


We seem to be at cross purposes.  You said you were using the
development book, now you mention an initramfs so clearly you have
at least something from BLFS.  So, specifying the version(s) of the
books might be relevant.  I've only booted (sysv) later than 8.3 on
two systems, one with 4.14.71, the other with 4.18.9, using
LFS-20180920 and BLFS-20180915 with occasional newer versions,
and neither have the entropy problem.

BUT: with 4.18.x and your delay of 12 seconds - What boot messages
(sysv) follow after that 12 second delay (and yes, just a summary of
WHICH bootscript runs after the delay - I know what it is like trying
to write down the messages once the bootscripts are running.)

cat /var/log/boot.log


Is it created if /sbin/init is not called?

Pierre


Nope, it is not.

Frans

--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Boot freezes

[Frans de Boer]

On 9/27/18 10:01 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:

On 09/27/2018 02:21 PM, Frans de Boer wrote:

LS,

I have a problem which I don't seem to be able to solve without 
further help.


Using the development version for LFS, I get stuck every time during 
boot time. It happens either after the message
"Fast init done" or right thereafter - with a delay of aprox 12 
seconds - at the message "Fast crng done".


This problem is with the standard LFS as well as the LFS-systemd.

Anyone has a suggestion?


It sounds like a kernel configuration issue.  For your message is 
seems that it doesn't even get to /sbin/init which is where the 
userspace is initiated.


You don't say what version of the kernel you are using, but I suppose 
it is it 4.18.9.  Did you do 'make modules_install' ?  You might want 
to try an earlier known good kernel version.


  -- Bruce


Ken and Bruce,

I suspected it has to do something with entropy, so I used 4.9.88 - 
4.9.2 dit not compiled - and the result was the same. So, since 4.9.88 
is from somewhere in March I assume that there is no provision yet for 
the spectre etc. issue.


And yes, of course I did "modules_install", the modules are installed 
and the initramfs is generated properly too. Until August all worked 
well, but after August it did not anymore.


As far as I understand /sbin/init is called after enough random data has 
been collected. I just remember that sysvinit has been upgraded too to 
2.90 instead of 2.89 with patches. Might a problem there? I will 
certainly give it a try to use 2.89 again, just to satisfy my curiosity ;)


I also will make myself familiar with debugging the boot procedure. 
Somewhere on the Internet there must be a good tutorial to find.


--- Frans.

--
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

[lfs-support] Boot freezes

[Frans de Boer]

LS,

I have a problem which I don't seem to be able to solve without further 
help.


Using the development version for LFS, I get stuck every time during 
boot time. It happens either after the message
"Fast init done" or right thereafter - with a delay of aprox 12 seconds 
- at the message "Fast crng done".


This problem is with the standard LFS as well as the LFS-systemd.

Anyone has a suggestion?

Rgards, Frans.

--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Booting LFS with systemd - SOLVED

[Frans de Boer]

On 07/24/2018 01:01 AM, Ken Moffat wrote:

On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 05:20:41PM -0500, Douglas R. Reno wrote:

On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 8:47 AM Frans de Boer  wrote:


This quite frustrating. After recompiling, following the book to the
letter, I still get a frozen LFS system.
One thing I do note however is that the freezing always occurs after
systemd has detected that it is on a virtual machine. A number of
error messages is send, but due to ratelimiting I can't see them
because they are suppressed.

I had even rebuild everything with systemd-232, and that worked as
before. But after 232, things started to behave strange. Now way to
debug systemd, whatever I do

Help?

Frans,

Can you please try systemd-239? It should show up in the render tomorrow
morning (US Central time, I'm not sure what it is in UTC).

I'll make sure it lands in BLFS here in the coming days, just extremely
busy outside of LFS.

If that does't help, now that I've had to apply a workaround
to two of my sysv systems to speed booting (lack of entropy on some
machines with integrated video and only an SSD) I've got an
alternative suggestion - if the kernel is 4.17 or later, or 4.16.4
or later, or (perhaps) 4.14.36 or later, it contains a CVE fix which
ensures that getrandom() will not return until the CRNG is properly
initialised.

That is reported to severely impact _some_ VMs' startup times.

The easiest workaround is to install haveged in chroot, and its
systemd file in your case.  If that is the problem, people differ
about the quality of what haveged provides - if you need to generate
long-lived security kees (e.g. for gpg) in the VM see
https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/7/23/857 (Ted Ts'o's reply to me when I
suggested that if I had to use haveged the boot was fast but didn't
it weaken future entropy?)

ĸen


Thanks to the availability of systemd-239 and the fact that finally the 
patch regarding the man-pages is available, I can now confirm that all 
is well again with systemd-239.
Thus, it was a systemd problem, I have tried the standard systemd-239 a 
long time ago, but since I have no idea how to make the specific patches 
to for LFS, I could not build that. Maybe make it clear what is done to 
make the specific systemd patch or is it a lot of hand work?


I remember that we only need doxygen as an additional package to build 
systemd without the LFS patch, right?


Regards, Frans.

--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Kernel bug involving physical to virtual remapping

[Frans de Boer]

On 07/19/2018 09:34 PM, Michael Shell wrote:

On Thu, 19 Jul 2018 13:54:19 +0200
Frans de Boer  wrote:


But I can't compile 4.13. anymore because I now have gcc 8.1 instead
of the former 7 series.


   Frans,

What goes wrong when you try to build a 4.13 kernel with gcc 8.1?
It should work, right?

Are there any good reasons not to use a gcc 8 series kernel?


   Cheers,

   Mike


I get an syntax error when compiling pager.c. I had this before and 
remembered that gcc 8.1 is less forgiving then the 7 series. So, I tried 
to compile the kernel within the LFS development (systemd) environment 
which ended with said error.


The next I tried 4.14.0 and all went well. That said, I just go 
somewhere else shopping, maybe there is something altered in either 
systemd (234-8) or the kernel after 4.13.x. I don't believe that this is 
the right thread anymore.


I start with making a VM with a new image of various recent 
distributions and see if the same problem occurs there. If not, then it 
must be a LFS problem.


-- Frans.


--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Booting LFS with systemd

[Frans de Boer]

On 06-07-18 16:44, Bruce Dubbs wrote:

On 07/06/2018 01:20 AM, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 07/05/2018 11:56 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:

On 07/05/2018 02:48 PM, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 06/30/2018 01:29 PM, Hazel Russman wrote:

On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 01:25:29 -0400
Michael Shell  wrote:


On Thu, 28 Jun 2018 16:06:00 +0800
Xi Ruoyao  wrote:

Now I only use "initrd" directive to update CPU microcode and fix 
the

buggy ACPI DSDT of my laptop (another sad story).


.

And as there now seems to be several people who suffer with the
ACPI DSDT driver bug, you guys should make sure upstream is aware
of the problem, if they aren't already.


...

   Cheers,

   Mike

--
I did a git bisect on my system, but I couldn't make much sense of 
the result. The commit it finally settled on didn't seem to have 
anything to with acpi.


[quote]
Bisecting: 2 revisions left to test after this (roughly 1 step)
[9af9b94068fb1ea3206a700fc222075966fbef14] x86/cpu/AMD: Handle SME 
reduction in physical address size


Bisecting: 0 revisions left to test after this (roughly 1 step)
[33c2b803edd13487518a2c7d5002d84d7e9c878f] x86/mm: Remove 
phys_to_virt() usage in ioremap()


Bisecting: 0 revisions left to test after this (roughly 0 steps)
[7744ccdbc16f0ac4adae21b3678af93775b3a386] x86/mm: Add Secure 
Memory Encryption (SME) support

[unquote]

I sent the result to the kernel acpi development list but never got 
an answer. If someone else on this list wants to try, I can send 
him my complete bisect logs.


--
Hazel
This quite frustrating. After recompiling, following the book to the 
letter, I still get a frozen LFS system.
One thing I do note however is that the freezing always occurs after 
systemd has detected that it is on a virtual machine. A number of 
error messages is send, but due to ratelimiting I can't see them 
because they are suppressed.


I had even rebuild everything with systemd-232, and that worked as 
before. But after 232, things started to behave strange. Now way to 
debug systemd, whatever I do


Help?


I don't mean to be pedantic, but I really don't think you would run 
into these types of problems using System V.  Why not try that?


  -- Bruce


Hi Bruce,
With System V there is - of course - no problem. The thing is that 
systemd - if it runs well - is somewhat easier to use because of the 
use of .service files.


I'll have to disagree that service files are easier.  What I do agree 
with is that they are more consistent among distros.  The boot scripts 
for System V are really quite easy to read and, if needed, write.


  I also noticed that some packages are only shipping
.service(.in) files and have abandon the use of sysVinit files. 


Then they are abandoning those distros that do not use systemd such as 
the BSDs and Devuan.  But those distros can easily add their own boot 
scripts.  I'll note that all the BLFS packages that need boot scripts 
have them,


Combined with the fact that most distributions have embraced systemd 
as their primary or only init system let me believe that we are stuck 
with this piece of ever growing mutation. And as LFS is a teaching 
ground, it should - however reluctant - incorporated this too.


As a teaching tool, NOT using systemd is essential.  There is far too 
much done by systemd in an opaque manner that System V demonstrates and, 
if desired,implemented in custom ways.


Also, the goal is that someone fire-up their basic hardware with a LFS 
born OS, but for testing or use in VM's development is nowadays mostly 
within the VM realm.


When I teach LFS in class, I always have the students use real HW, There 
are too many things that VMs hide,


   -- Bruce


Bruce,

I agree that VM's hide some issues and I do understand you position 
about systemd. Although I disagree to some level. After all, should we 
learn people how to crackup a (very) old car or the new generally 
available way using some sort of key. Just focusing only on System V is 
precisely what industries mean when they talk about "they are not being 
taught the modern technics.".
Remember the days past, the discussion of having systemd included in the 
LFS book? Eventual it was included. Now the next "new" thing maybe?


Why not using VM's when one can continue developing without having to 
reboot into an incomplete system environment. Also, if one has multiple 
systems to spare, bare metal can be a way. If not, VM's are a welcome 
solution.


So, I think that I am chasing the wrong ghost and have a talk with the 
systemd developers instead. Despite the lack of interest for using VM's, 
I shall share any positive result with the LFS list.


Regards, Frans.
--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Kernel bug involving physical to virtual remapping - CLOSED

[Frans de Boer]

On 19-07-18 14:57, Hazel Russman wrote:

On Thu, 19 Jul 2018 13:54:19 +0200
Frans de Boer  wrote:

However a git bisection showed that this is actually a memory management issue. 
The kernel commit that caused the problem is :
[33c2b803edd13487518a2c7d5002d84d7e9c878f] x86/mm: Remove
phys_to_virt() usage in ioremap().

Reintroducing the code:
"if (is_ISA_range(phys_addr, last_addr))
return (__force void __iomem *)phys_to_virt(phys_addr);"
makes the system bootable again. I have also tested this on a 4.15 kernel and 
it works there too.



Hello Hazel,

What you inserted is already available as from the 4.13.0 release. But I
can't compile 4.13. anymore because I now have gcc 8.1 instead of the
former 7 series.

I continue my search and go for 4.14 where the check is removed. But i
guess that will fail too and this is no solution to my problem with
systemd freezing just after it found out that it is on a VM.

--- Frans

--

Yes, I can boot 4.13 kernels without any problems. But I wanted an LTS kernel 
that can keep up with the newest exploits (especially meltdown) and the next 
LTS after 4.9 is 4.14. I'm using bare iron, not a VM (and no systemd!), but 
it's rather old hardware. The processor is an Intel Core Duo. I can send you 
the cpuinfo if you want it.

I suspect that if you did build 4.14, it would behave properly; after all, it 
does for most people. I have 4.15 on my laptop (which has a Via Nano processor) 
and no problems there. But I'd be happy to carry out any exploratory tests you 
like on my desktop, since that's the machine that misbehaves.


Hello Hazel,

I get the impression you have been send to me with the wrong 
info/background. I have no problem running things on bare metal, but it 
is the problem with LFS and having systemd on a VM. As explained in the 
thread 'Booting LFS with Systemd'.
I know that Bruce uses bare metal too, but why not using VM's when one 
can continue developing without having to reboot into an incomplete 
system environment. Also, if one has multiple systems to spare, bare 
metal can be a way. If not, VM's are a welcome solution.


So, I think that I am chasing the wrong ghost and have a talk with the 
systemd developers instead. Despite the lack of interest for using VM's, 
I shall share any positive result with the LFS list.


Discussing closed.

Regards Frans.

--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Kernel bug involving physical to virtual remapping

[Frans de Boer]

On 07/17/2018 03:15 PM, Hazel Russman wrote:

On Tue, 17 Jul 2018 14:06:09 +0200
Frans de Boer  wrote:


On 07/14/2018 06:56 PM, Hazel Russman wrote:

Gentlemen,

I was given your contact details by Michael Shell, who has been helping me to 
troubleshoot this problem via the Linux From Scratch support list.

For some time now I have been unable to boot recent kernels (4.14 or later) on my rather 
elderly desktop machine. The kernel panics during boot and the problem seems 
(superficially) to lie in the acpi driver. At least that is where the visible error 
messages come from. Booting with "acpi=off" works but is hardly an ideal 
solution.

However a git bisection showed that this is actually a memory management issue. 
The kernel commit that caused the problem is :
[33c2b803edd13487518a2c7d5002d84d7e9c878f] x86/mm: Remove
phys_to_virt() usage in ioremap().

Reintroducing the code:
"if (is_ISA_range(phys_addr, last_addr))
return (__force void __iomem *)phys_to_virt(phys_addr);"
makes the system bootable again. I have also tested this on a 4.15 kernel and 
it works there too.

If you want me to carry out any further tests, I would be happy to oblige, but 
do please bear in mind that I am not an expert, so you will need to give fairly 
basic instructions.

Hazel Russman

  

Hazel, sorry but where should I remove phys_to_virt()? If I delete the
complete if statement in the iounmap function, and replace that with the
above code, i get compile errors.

btw: acpi=off does not solve the issue too.

Frans.

--

No, it's the other way around. phys_to_virt() doesn't get removed; it gets 
inserted/reinserted just above the warning not to let normal RAM be remapped. 
This is code that was in the kernel before but someone took it out and that was 
what was causing me all that trouble.

Here's the patch that I made:
  
--- linux-4.13.0-rc1/arch/x86/mm/ioremap.c  2018-07-14 13:27:21.0 +0100

+++ linux-4.13.0-rc1.new/arch/x86/mm/ioremap.c  2018-07-14 16:00:14.071456762 
+0100
@@ -103,7 +103,12 @@
(unsigned long long)phys_addr);
 WARN_ON_ONCE(1);
 return NULL;
-   }
+   }
+/* Don't remap the low PCI/ISA area, it's always mapped..
+*/
+   if (is_ISA_range(phys_addr, last_addr))
+   return (__force void __iomem *)phys_to_virt(phys_addr);
+
  
 /*

  * Don't allow anybody to remap normal RAM that we're using..

Sorry if this is a bit inexpert. I'm not used to creating patches and I did the 
actual edit by hand.

I didn't touch anything else in that file. And it built normally with just that 
edit.


Hello Hazel,

What you inserted is already available as from the 4.13.0 release. But I 
can't compile 4.13. anymore because I now have gcc 8.1 instead of the 
former 7 series.


I continue my search and go for 4.14 where the check is removed. But i 
guess that will fail too and this is no solution to my problem with 
systemd freezing just after it found out that it is on a VM.


--- Frans

--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Kernel bug involving physical to virtual remapping

[Frans de Boer]

On 07/14/2018 06:56 PM, Hazel Russman wrote:

Gentlemen,

I was given your contact details by Michael Shell, who has been helping me to 
troubleshoot this problem via the Linux From Scratch support list.

For some time now I have been unable to boot recent kernels (4.14 or later) on my rather 
elderly desktop machine. The kernel panics during boot and the problem seems 
(superficially) to lie in the acpi driver. At least that is where the visible error 
messages come from. Booting with "acpi=off" works but is hardly an ideal 
solution.

However a git bisection showed that this is actually a memory management issue. 
The kernel commit that caused the problem is :
[33c2b803edd13487518a2c7d5002d84d7e9c878f] x86/mm: Remove
phys_to_virt() usage in ioremap().

Reintroducing the code:
"if (is_ISA_range(phys_addr, last_addr))
return (__force void __iomem *)phys_to_virt(phys_addr);"
makes the system bootable again. I have also tested this on a 4.15 kernel and 
it works there too.

If you want me to carry out any further tests, I would be happy to oblige, but 
do please bear in mind that I am not an expert, so you will need to give fairly 
basic instructions.

Hazel Russman


Hazel, sorry but where should I remove phys_to_virt()? If I delete the 
complete if statement in the iounmap function, and replace that with the 
above code, i get compile errors.


btw: acpi=off does not solve the issue too.

Frans.

--
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

Re: [lfs-support] chapter 6, glibc compile error

[Frans de Boer]

On 07/15/2018 11:26 PM, Armin K. wrote:

On 15.7.2018. 21:19, Frans de Boer wrote:

LS,

Below is a repeated piece of information, now being brought as a 
separate issue from systemd.


I get the following error when i try to compile glibc in chapter 6:
...
bison --yacc --name-prefix=__gettext --output 
/sources-lfs/glibc-2.27/glibc-build/intl/plural.c plural.y

bison: m4 subprocess failed: No such file or directory
make[2]: *** [Makefile:46: 
/sources-lfs/glibc-2.27/glibc-build/intl/plural.c] Error 1

make[2]: Leaving directory '/sources-lfs/glibc-2.27/intl'
make[1]: *** [Makefile:215: intl/subdir_lib] Error 2
make[1]: Leaving directory '/sources-lfs/glibc-2.27'
make: *** [Makefile:9: all] Error 2

If I include 'ln -sfv /tools/bin/m4 /usr/bin' as suggested some time 
ago, I can compile glibc. In an effort to understand why systemd 
crashes and having a message that there is a segfault in glibc while 
booting, i tried to recompile all again. Now I can't even compile glibc.


Is this a result of some modification in the tool chain, or is the 
documentation not up to date?


Regards,
Frans.


You need to build m4 before bison in chapter 5. Ensure you're building 
in the same order as the current book(s).

Thnx Armin,

I did not noticed that the build sequence was altered. Your remark was 
on the mark.

Now I can continue with the systemd question :)

--- Frans.
--
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

Re: [lfs-support] chapter 6, glibc compile error

[Frans de Boer]

On 07/15/2018 10:39 PM, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 07/15/2018 10:09 PM, Ken Moffat wrote:

On Sun, Jul 15, 2018 at 09:19:22PM +0200, Frans de Boer wrote:

LS,

Below is a repeated piece of information, now being brought as a 
separate

issue from systemd.

I get the following error when i try to compile glibc in chapter 6:
...
bison --yacc --name-prefix=__gettext --output
/sources-lfs/glibc-2.27/glibc-build/intl/plural.c plural.y
bison: m4 subprocess failed: No such file or directory
make[2]: *** [Makefile:46:
/sources-lfs/glibc-2.27/glibc-build/intl/plural.c] Error 1
make[2]: Leaving directory '/sources-lfs/glibc-2.27/intl'
make[1]: *** [Makefile:215: intl/subdir_lib] Error 2
make[1]: Leaving directory '/sources-lfs/glibc-2.27'
make: *** [Makefile:9: all] Error 2

If I include 'ln -sfv /tools/bin/m4 /usr/bin' as suggested some time 
ago, I
can compile glibc. In an effort to understand why systemd crashes 
and having

a message that there is a segfault in glibc while booting, i tried to
recompile all again. Now I can't even compile glibc.

Is this a result of some modification in the tool chain, or is the
documentation not up to date?

Regards,
Frans.

I don't think the documentation is out of date.  My last running
system is from 15th June, although I built as far as the end of
chroot from the 26th June book to look at a possible perl issue.
And both were sysv.

This is an unusual problem.  I think your version of m4 in /tools is
linked to *host* libc and ld-linux.  By copying the prog into chroot
it can now find libc and the loader,

I suggest that, outside chroot, you run ldd on /tools/bin/m4. If I
am right, also check the links for an executable (prog, or lib, or
libexec) from every other package in chapter 5 after pass 2 gcc.

Some of the tools progs appear to be ok, maybe only m4 was wrong,
perhaps you built in stages and resumed without one of the envvars
set correctly, e.g. PATH ?

ĸen
I build the toolchain first, - without interruption - and after that I 
started with chapter 6.

Within chroot, m4 can be found and executed.
After starting chapter 6 up to and including the creation of links in 
lib64 - prior to running configure for glibc - the result of ldd 
/tools.bin/m4 is:

  linux-vdso.so.1 (0x7fff2bcca000)
  libc.so.6 => /lib64/libc.so.6 (0x7fb4fd3c7000)
  /tools/lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 => /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 
(0x7fb4fd781000)


where ld-linux-x86_64.so.2 links to /lib.
Note that /lib64/libc.so.6 does not exist. I think that should be 
/tools/lib64/libc.so.6?


I did not modified anything and any other program did worked before, 
so I wait a little to check all other programs after gcc-2.


--- Frans.

BTW: making the link /lib64/ldc.so.6 -> /tools/lib64/libc.so.6 is also 
no solution.


--- Frans

--
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

Re: [lfs-support] chapter 6, glibc compile error

[Frans de Boer]

On 07/15/2018 10:09 PM, Ken Moffat wrote:

On Sun, Jul 15, 2018 at 09:19:22PM +0200, Frans de Boer wrote:

LS,

Below is a repeated piece of information, now being brought as a separate
issue from systemd.

I get the following error when i try to compile glibc in chapter 6:
...
bison --yacc --name-prefix=__gettext --output
/sources-lfs/glibc-2.27/glibc-build/intl/plural.c plural.y
bison: m4 subprocess failed: No such file or directory
make[2]: *** [Makefile:46:
/sources-lfs/glibc-2.27/glibc-build/intl/plural.c] Error 1
make[2]: Leaving directory '/sources-lfs/glibc-2.27/intl'
make[1]: *** [Makefile:215: intl/subdir_lib] Error 2
make[1]: Leaving directory '/sources-lfs/glibc-2.27'
make: *** [Makefile:9: all] Error 2

If I include 'ln -sfv /tools/bin/m4 /usr/bin' as suggested some time ago, I
can compile glibc. In an effort to understand why systemd crashes and having
a message that there is a segfault in glibc while booting, i tried to
recompile all again. Now I can't even compile glibc.

Is this a result of some modification in the tool chain, or is the
documentation not up to date?

Regards,
Frans.

I don't think the documentation is out of date.  My last running
system is from 15th June, although I built as far as the end of
chroot from the 26th June book to look at a possible perl issue.
And both were sysv.

This is an unusual problem.  I think your version of m4 in /tools is
linked to *host* libc and ld-linux.  By copying the prog into chroot
it can now find libc and the loader,

I suggest that, outside chroot, you run ldd on /tools/bin/m4.  If I
am right, also check the links for an executable (prog, or lib, or
libexec) from every other package in chapter 5 after pass 2 gcc.

Some of the tools progs appear to be ok, maybe only m4 was wrong,
perhaps you built in stages and resumed without one of the envvars
set correctly, e.g. PATH ?

ĸen
I build the toolchain first, - without interruption - and after that I 
started with chapter 6.

Within chroot, m4 can be found and executed.
After starting chapter 6 up to and including the creation of links in 
lib64 - prior to running configure for glibc - the result of ldd 
/tools.bin/m4 is:

  linux-vdso.so.1 (0x7fff2bcca000)
  libc.so.6 => /lib64/libc.so.6 (0x7fb4fd3c7000)
  /tools/lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 => /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 
(0x7fb4fd781000)


where ld-linux-x86_64.so.2 links to /lib.
Note that /lib64/libc.so.6 does not exist. I think that should be 
/tools/lib64/libc.so.6?


I did not modified anything and any other program did worked before, so 
I wait a little to check all other programs after gcc-2.


--- Frans.

--
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

[lfs-support] chapter 6, glibc compile error

[Frans de Boer]

LS,

Below is a repeated piece of information, now being brought as a 
separate issue from systemd.


I get the following error when i try to compile glibc in chapter 6:
...
bison --yacc --name-prefix=__gettext --output 
/sources-lfs/glibc-2.27/glibc-build/intl/plural.c plural.y

bison: m4 subprocess failed: No such file or directory
make[2]: *** [Makefile:46: 
/sources-lfs/glibc-2.27/glibc-build/intl/plural.c] Error 1

make[2]: Leaving directory '/sources-lfs/glibc-2.27/intl'
make[1]: *** [Makefile:215: intl/subdir_lib] Error 2
make[1]: Leaving directory '/sources-lfs/glibc-2.27'
make: *** [Makefile:9: all] Error 2

If I include 'ln -sfv /tools/bin/m4 /usr/bin' as suggested some time 
ago, I can compile glibc. In an effort to understand why systemd crashes 
and having a message that there is a segfault in glibc while booting, i 
tried to recompile all again. Now I can't even compile glibc.


Is this a result of some modification in the tool chain, or is the 
documentation not up to date?


Regards,
Frans.
--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Kernel bug involving physical to virtual remapping

[Frans de Boer]

On 07/14/2018 06:56 PM, Hazel Russman wrote:

Gentlemen,

I was given your contact details by Michael Shell, who has been helping me to 
troubleshoot this problem via the Linux From Scratch support list.

For some time now I have been unable to boot recent kernels (4.14 or later) on my rather 
elderly desktop machine. The kernel panics during boot and the problem seems 
(superficially) to lie in the acpi driver. At least that is where the visible error 
messages come from. Booting with "acpi=off" works but is hardly an ideal 
solution.

However a git bisection showed that this is actually a memory management issue. 
The kernel commit that caused the problem is :
[33c2b803edd13487518a2c7d5002d84d7e9c878f] x86/mm: Remove
phys_to_virt() usage in ioremap().

Reintroducing the code:
"if (is_ISA_range(phys_addr, last_addr))
return (__force void __iomem *)phys_to_virt(phys_addr);"
makes the system bootable again. I have also tested this on a 4.15 kernel and 
it works there too.

If you want me to carry out any further tests, I would be happy to oblige, but 
do please bear in mind that I am not an expert, so you will need to give fairly 
basic instructions.

Hazel Russman



Thnx Hazel,

I will try this in the comming days ahead.

--- Frans.

--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Booting LFS with systemd

[Frans de Boer]

On 13-07-18 16:24, Michael Shell wrote:

On Fri, 13 Jul 2018 09:35:24 -0400
Michael Shell  wrote:


what exactly did gdb say about systemd's crash?



And FWIW, command output can be logged to a file as well as displayed
on the screen at the same time via the use of tee:

gdb /bin/program | tee gdb_log.txt

Actually, from

https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-software-2/bash-how-to-redirect-output-to-file-and-still-have-it-on-screen-412611/

it is even better also redirect stderr and use a subshell to avoid
order problems due to buffering:

(gdb /bin/program 2>&1) | tee gdb_log.txt

Then you can interact with gdb as needed and a copy of the
"conversation" will be in gdb_log.txt.


  Cheers,

  Mike

In order to use gdb, I need to compile it in. However, I now am stuck at 
glibc not compiling when following the LFS instruction is chapter six 
exactly.


So, I need that to be fixed first, then I need tlc, expect, deganu and 
gdb to be compiled in to even load it.


--- Frans.
--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Booting LFS with systemd

[Frans de Boer]

On 06-07-18 08:23, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 07/06/2018 05:32 AM, Michael Shell wrote:

On Thu, 5 Jul 2018 21:48:16 +0200
Frans de Boer  wrote:


I had even rebuild everything with systemd-232, and that worked as
before. But after 232, things started to behave strange. Now way to
debug systemd, whatever I do


    Frans,

That's the whole point of being able to start the system with a shell
- so that systemd's startup, or failure thereof, can then be debugged
manually. What happened when you booted to shell and then tried to
start systemd manually?

init=/bin/bash
mount -o remount,rw /

Then, at the bash prompt, you want to try to start systemd manually.
You'll also want to first make sure you get a core file if/when it
crashes:

echo "core" > /proc/sys/kernel/core_pattern
ulimit -c unlimited

/usr/lib/systemd/systemd


With the above, does systemd crash and yield a core file?

Does

dmesg

show any relevant error messages?

If you get a core file, you can run gdb on systemd using the core
file:

gdb -c core /usr/lib/systemd/systemd

then what does the gdb backtrace reveal:

(gdb) bt


You can also try gdb on systemd without the core:

gdb /usr/lib/systemd/systemd
(gdb) run
(gdb) bt


If I had to bet at this point, my money would go on the theory that
your kernel is lacking support for something systemd (now) needs.
You can find a current list of systemd kernel config requirements
here:

https://cgit.freedesktop.org/systemd/systemd/tree/README

Note also, some kernel features must be *disabled*, e.g.,
CONFIG_SYSFS_DEPRECATED=n

Also, "systemd requires that the /run mount point exists.
    systemd also requires that /var/run is a symlink to
    /run "


    Cheers,

    Mike


Hi Mike,
I will follow your suggestions, of which few are new to me, and will 
come back with a report.


--- Frans

I get the following error:

...
bison --yacc --name-prefix=__gettext --output 
/sources-lfs/glibc-2.27/glibc-build/intl/plural.c plural.y

bison: m4 subprocess failed: No such file or directory
make[2]: *** [Makefile:46: 
/sources-lfs/glibc-2.27/glibc-build/intl/plural.c] Error 1

make[2]: Leaving directory '/sources-lfs/glibc-2.27/intl'
make[1]: *** [Makefile:215: intl/subdir_lib] Error 2
make[1]: Leaving directory '/sources-lfs/glibc-2.27'
make: *** [Makefile:9: all] Error 2

If I include 'ln -sfv /tools/bin/m4 /usr/bin' as suggested some time 
ago, I can compile glibc. In an effort to understand why systemd crashes 
and having a message that there is a segfault in glibc while booting, i 
tried to recompile all again. Now I can't even compile glibc.


Is this a result of some modification in the tool chain, or is de 
documentation not upto date?


--- Frans.
--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Booting LFS with systemd

[Frans de Boer]

On 07/06/2018 05:32 AM, Michael Shell wrote:

On Thu, 5 Jul 2018 21:48:16 +0200
Frans de Boer  wrote:


I had even rebuild everything with systemd-232, and that worked as
before. But after 232, things started to behave strange. Now way to
debug systemd, whatever I do


Frans,

That's the whole point of being able to start the system with a shell
- so that systemd's startup, or failure thereof, can then be debugged
manually. What happened when you booted to shell and then tried to
start systemd manually?

init=/bin/bash
mount -o remount,rw /

Then, at the bash prompt, you want to try to start systemd manually.
You'll also want to first make sure you get a core file if/when it
crashes:

echo "core" > /proc/sys/kernel/core_pattern
ulimit -c unlimited

/usr/lib/systemd/systemd


With the above, does systemd crash and yield a core file?

Does

dmesg

show any relevant error messages?

If you get a core file, you can run gdb on systemd using the core
file:

gdb -c core /usr/lib/systemd/systemd

then what does the gdb backtrace reveal:

(gdb) bt


You can also try gdb on systemd without the core:

gdb /usr/lib/systemd/systemd
(gdb) run
(gdb) bt


If I had to bet at this point, my money would go on the theory that
your kernel is lacking support for something systemd (now) needs.
You can find a current list of systemd kernel config requirements
here:

https://cgit.freedesktop.org/systemd/systemd/tree/README

Note also, some kernel features must be *disabled*, e.g.,
CONFIG_SYSFS_DEPRECATED=n

Also, "systemd requires that the /run mount point exists.
systemd also requires that /var/run is a symlink to
/run "


Cheers,

Mike


Hi Mike,
I will follow your suggestions, of which few are new to me, and will 
come back with a report.


--- Frans
--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Booting LFS with systemd

[Frans de Boer]

On 07/05/2018 11:56 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:

On 07/05/2018 02:48 PM, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 06/30/2018 01:29 PM, Hazel Russman wrote:

On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 01:25:29 -0400
Michael Shell  wrote:


On Thu, 28 Jun 2018 16:06:00 +0800
Xi Ruoyao  wrote:


Now I only use "initrd" directive to update CPU microcode and fix the
buggy ACPI DSDT of my laptop (another sad story).


.

And as there now seems to be several people who suffer with the
ACPI DSDT driver bug, you guys should make sure upstream is aware
of the problem, if they aren't already.


...

   Cheers,

   Mike

--
I did a git bisect on my system, but I couldn't make much sense of 
the result. The commit it finally settled on didn't seem to have 
anything to with acpi.


[quote]
Bisecting: 2 revisions left to test after this (roughly 1 step)
[9af9b94068fb1ea3206a700fc222075966fbef14] x86/cpu/AMD: Handle SME 
reduction in physical address size


Bisecting: 0 revisions left to test after this (roughly 1 step)
[33c2b803edd13487518a2c7d5002d84d7e9c878f] x86/mm: Remove 
phys_to_virt() usage in ioremap()


Bisecting: 0 revisions left to test after this (roughly 0 steps)
[7744ccdbc16f0ac4adae21b3678af93775b3a386] x86/mm: Add Secure Memory 
Encryption (SME) support

[unquote]

I sent the result to the kernel acpi development list but never got 
an answer. If someone else on this list wants to try, I can send him 
my complete bisect logs.


--
Hazel
This quite frustrating. After recompiling, following the book to the 
letter, I still get a frozen LFS system.
One thing I do note however is that the freezing always occurs after 
systemd has detected that it is on a virtual machine. A number of 
error messages is send, but due to ratelimiting I can't see them 
because they are suppressed.


I had even rebuild everything with systemd-232, and that worked as 
before. But after 232, things started to behave strange. Now way to 
debug systemd, whatever I do


Help?


I don't mean to be pedantic, but I really don't think you would run 
into these types of problems using System V.  Why not try that?


  -- Bruce


Hi Bruce,
With System V there is - of course - no problem. The thing is that 
systemd - if it runs well - is somewhat easier to use because of the use 
of .service files. I also noticed that some packages are only shipping 
.service(.in) files and have abandon the use of sysVinit files. Combined 
with the fact that most distributions have embraced systemd as their 
primary or only init system let me believe that we are stuck with this 
piece of ever growing mutation. And as LFS is a teaching ground, it 
should - however reluctant - incorporated this too.


Also, the goal is that someone fire-up their basic hardware with a LFS 
born OS, but for testing or use in VM's development is nowadays mostly 
within the VM realm.


Regards,
Frans
--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Booting LFS with systemd

[Frans de Boer]

On 06/30/2018 01:29 PM, Hazel Russman wrote:

On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 01:25:29 -0400
Michael Shell  wrote:


On Thu, 28 Jun 2018 16:06:00 +0800
Xi Ruoyao  wrote:


Now I only use "initrd" directive to update CPU microcode and fix the
buggy ACPI DSDT of my laptop (another sad story).


.

And as there now seems to be several people who suffer with the
ACPI DSDT driver bug, you guys should make sure upstream is aware
of the problem, if they aren't already.


...

   Cheers,

   Mike

--

I did a git bisect on my system, but I couldn't make much sense of the result. 
The commit it finally settled on didn't seem to have anything to with acpi.

[quote]
Bisecting: 2 revisions left to test after this (roughly 1 step)
[9af9b94068fb1ea3206a700fc222075966fbef14] x86/cpu/AMD: Handle SME reduction in 
physical address size

Bisecting: 0 revisions left to test after this (roughly 1 step)
[33c2b803edd13487518a2c7d5002d84d7e9c878f] x86/mm: Remove phys_to_virt() usage 
in ioremap()

Bisecting: 0 revisions left to test after this (roughly 0 steps)
[7744ccdbc16f0ac4adae21b3678af93775b3a386] x86/mm: Add Secure Memory Encryption 
(SME) support
[unquote]

I sent the result to the kernel acpi development list but never got an answer. 
If someone else on this list wants to try, I can send him my complete bisect 
logs.

--
Hazel
This quite frustrating. After recompiling, following the book to the 
letter, I still get a frozen LFS system.
One thing I do note however is that the freezing always occurs after 
systemd has detected that it is on a virtual machine. A number of error 
messages is send, but due to ratelimiting I can't see them because they 
are suppressed.


I had even rebuild everything with systemd-232, and that worked as 
before. But after 232, things started to behave strange. Now way to 
debug systemd, whatever I do


Help?
Frans.
--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Booting LFS with systemd

[Frans de Boer]

On 06/28/2018 09:54 PM, Thanos Baloukas wrote:

On 28/06/2018 10:44 μμ, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 06/28/2018 04:21 PM, Hazel Russman wrote:

On Thu, 28 Jun 2018 16:06:00 +0800
Xi Ruoyao  wrote:


On 2018-06-28 01:08 -0400, Michael Shell wrote:

On Wed, 27 Jun 2018 14:42:47 -0700
Paul Rogers  wrote:

If that's true, even with systemd, why is there any need to build an
initramfs for a known system?
I had used initramfs to setup a loopback device and boot the system 
in an
image.  But it seems grub can handle loopback device (though I've 
never

tried).

Just like you, I build everything I need into a custom kernel and 
avoid
the need for an initramfs. One other reason people use initramfs 
is if
they need udev services on boot, say, for a drive the kernel will 
not be

able to find via a simple specification of root=/dev/X.

I think people should not go through all the initramfs trouble 
just for

LABEL= or UUID= functionality, but rather should just use PARTUUID=
which the kernel natively understands.
Agree.  Now I only use "initrd" directive to update CPU microcode 
and fix

the buggy ACPI DSDT of my laptop (another sad story).
--
Xi Ruoyao 
School of Aerospace Science and Technology, Xidian University
--
Nice to know someone else does this. I use an initrd on my main 
machine for precisely these two purposes. I had hoped that rewriting 
the acpi dsdt to remove some reported errors would allow me finally 
to boot the latest kernels, which are giving me panic in the acpi 
driver, but no such luck!


Mind you, I'm not using systemd.

Great, new development, now I can't even install systemd due to the 
next error:

...
RuntimeError: File 'man/binfmt.d.5' could not be found
FAILED: meson-install

When looking for the missing file, I only found 'man/binfmt.d.xml'. I 
also refreshed the two systemd-238 packages to exclude a fallen bit, 
to no avail. Any suggestion where this might come from?




Did you extract the man pages?
tar -xf /path/to/systemd-man-pages-238.tar.xz


Shoot, I had commented that out for another test :( Thnx.

And the story continues.


--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Booting LFS with systemd

[Frans de Boer]

On 06/28/2018 04:21 PM, Hazel Russman wrote:

On Thu, 28 Jun 2018 16:06:00 +0800
Xi Ruoyao  wrote:


On 2018-06-28 01:08 -0400, Michael Shell wrote:

On Wed, 27 Jun 2018 14:42:47 -0700
Paul Rogers  wrote:
   

If that's true, even with systemd, why is there any need to build an
initramfs for a known system?

I had used initramfs to setup a loopback device and boot the system in an
image.  But it seems grub can handle loopback device (though I've never
tried).


Just like you, I build everything I need into a custom kernel and avoid
the need for an initramfs. One other reason people use initramfs is if
they need udev services on boot, say, for a drive the kernel will not be
able to find via a simple specification of root=/dev/X.

I think people should not go through all the initramfs trouble just for
LABEL= or UUID= functionality, but rather should just use PARTUUID=
which the kernel natively understands.

Agree.  Now I only use "initrd" directive to update CPU microcode and fix
the buggy ACPI DSDT of my laptop (another sad story).
--
Xi Ruoyao 
School of Aerospace Science and Technology, Xidian University
--

Nice to know someone else does this. I use an initrd on my main machine for 
precisely these two purposes. I had hoped that rewriting the acpi dsdt to 
remove some reported errors would allow me finally to boot the latest kernels, 
which are giving me panic in the acpi driver, but no such luck!

Mind you, I'm not using systemd.

Great, new development, now I can't even install systemd due to the next 
error:

...
RuntimeError: File 'man/binfmt.d.5' could not be found
FAILED: meson-install

When looking for the missing file, I only found 'man/binfmt.d.xml'. I 
also refreshed the two systemd-238 packages to exclude a fallen bit, to 
no avail. Any suggestion where this might come from?


Regards,
Frans.
--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Booting LFS with systemd

[Frans de Boer]

On 06/26/2018 07:16 AM, Michael Shell wrote:

On Mon, 25 Jun 2018 09:19:35 +0200
Frans de Boer  wrote:


I have a strong reason to believe that it is systemd, since up-to
version 237 all worked well, but with version 237 and 238 - and nothing
else changed - it does not boot anymore.


   Frans,

Yes, I too believe that it is systemd. However, why you can't get
init=/bin/bash to boot is something that needs to be answered even if
systemd was booting OK. If you are using an initramfs, then that would
explain it because, as I understand it, in that case, systemd is still
required to start the init= line. This certainly is not a good thing,
IMHO, because init= is needed for such emergencies and there is a lot
that can go wrong with systemd, much, much more so than bash.

The systemd changelog can be seen here:

https://github.com/systemd/systemd/blob/master/NEWS

There are lot of changes to 238. Those that stand out to me are:

  1. The MemoryAccounting= unit property now defaults to on.

  2. Non-service units are now started with KeyringMode=shared
 by default.

  3.  /sys/fs/bpf is now mounted automatically.


So, you can try adding to the kernel command line:

MemoryAccounting=false

For #3, in the kernel config, make sure "Enable bpf() system call"
(CONFIG_BPF_SYSCALL) is enabled in the General Setup.

For #2, the unit files could be changed to use
KeyringMode=inherit
or some such.

I would also try using version 239 to see if that works (they may have
fixed a known bug).


   Cheers,

   Mike


I removed the need for using initrd, so now init=/bin/bash is working. 
Time to move forward and investigate what is causing the ABRT when 
starting systemd. Thanks for the pointer, it has grossed my mind before 
but somehow I forgot it again.


Regards, Frans

--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Booting LFS with systemd

[Frans de Boer]

On 06/25/2018 03:51 AM, Michael Shell wrote:

On Sun, 24 Jun 2018 10:01:48 +0200
Frans de Boer  wrote:


Same story, nothing happens.
I do notice, however, that on the listing by systemd capabilities the
text -ELFUTILS is used. I do compile the elfutils, but somehow systemd
does not use them. Is that a likely source of the problem?


Frans,

I don't know, but how do you know that systemd is not using them?

In anycase, I think that if init=/bin/bash can't bring up a shell
prompt, then that indicates a serious issue and one that should
be independent of systemd (unless you are using an initramfs/initrd,
see below).

When trying init=/bin/bash, what exactly does your kernel command
line look like?

Here is how someone approaches that in grub:

https://linuxconfig.org/how-to-reset-lost-root-password-on-ubuntu-16-04-xenial-xerus-linux

Their grub boot was changed to something like:

linux /boot/vmlinuz-4-4.0-22-generic root=UUID=43ad24d3-e\
c5b-44ee-a099-a88eb9520989 rw init=/bin/bash

But, without an initramfs, a PARTUUID should be used instead
(issue a blkid as root to see the list of drive names/IDs).

Now, with an initramfs/initrd it is my understanding that systemd still
starts first and then systemd calls the init= line:

https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2014-June/020016.html

Are you using an initrd? If so, can you build any needed drivers into
the kernel, specifiy your root filesystem via PARTUUID and then
try init=/bin/bash again without the use of any initrd?

Another possibility is that the terminal you get does see your
commands, its just that you can't see the response due to some
type of console setup issue. You could try seeing if issuing
some command, e.g., ls, does cause the hard drive access light
to flash.

I would also try booting the same filesystem, but with another,
known good, kernel to see if that helps.


Cheers,

Mike




Mike thanks for your replies. I shall follow your suggestions this week 
and shall be back when I have more answers.


I have a strong reason to believe that it is systemd, since up-to 
version 237 all worked well, but with version 237 and 238 - and nothing 
else changed - it does not boot anymore.


Regards, Frans.

--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Booting LFS with systemd

[Frans de Boer]

On 06/22/2018 07:30 AM, Michael Shell wrote:

On Thu, 21 Jun 2018 20:44:57 +0200
Frans de Boer  wrote:



Alas, tried everything from the site including the init statement to no
avail. The shell does not start due to an unapropriate ioctl.


According to this:

https://www.raspberrypi.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=179344

You should be able to overcome the inappropriate ioctl warning
simply by hitting enter to get the command prompt back.

Also, try

init=/bin/bash

rather than init=/bin/sh

You can also try/add:

systemd.unit=emergency.target

or

systemd.unit=rescue.target

on the kernel command line. But, try to get

init=/bin/bash

on the kernel command line to work first - that is a last resort failsafe
that should always work. If that won't boot, we can't expect systemd
or anything else to come up.

Remember, once you get a shell, you will have to do a

mount -o remount,rw /

to get the root directory mounted read/write.


   Mike

Same story, nothing happens.
I do notice, however, that on the listing by systemd capabilities the 
text -ELFUTILS is used. I do compile the elfutils, but somehow systemd 
does not use them. Is that a likely source of the problem?


Regards,
Frans.
--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Booting LFS with systemd

[Frans de Boer]

On 18-06-18 06:53, Michael Shell wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jun 2018 11:22:23 +0200
Frans de Boer  wrote:


Alas, keeping debugging symbols did not work. I still get the message
"no debug symbols found" and as a reaction to the bt command "no stack".



   Frans,

You will have to show us the commands you used so we can understand
what you did.

As per

https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=883690

did you obtain a systemd.coredump file?

You may have to alter some of the systemd boot parameters to be able
to get more useful information:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_debug_Systemd_problems
https://freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/Debugging/

The latter link shows how to debug systemd boot problems.

Some of the more relevant systemd boot parameters (to be added to
the kernel command line of your boot loader) mentioned include:

systemd.log_level=debug
systemd.dump_core=true
systemd.crash_shell=true

The first one should give you more information on the console.
The last one should be able to get you a shell after systemd crashes.
There will be a 10 second delay from the crash till the shell appears.

If you can't get a shell via systemd, then you can try booting to init
directly and then try starting systemd manually (to see if it crashes).
You should be able to get a core dump and run gdb on it in this way.
You will also have to manually remount the / filesystem as read/write:

init=/bin/sh
mount -o remount,rw /
exec /usr/lib/systemd/systemd


Cheers,

Mike

Alas, tried everything from the site including the init statement to no 
avail. The shell does not start due to an unapropriate ioctl.

also the gdb command still say "no stack".

It allstoped working with systemd 237.
I have checked and re-checked every item with the BSS (chapter 6) range. 
Found some spelling errorrs but still a dead system.
I do notice, hoeever, that it always ends with something of the 
clocksource. But surely, if I follow the book it should be right, i think.


Any more suggestions?

Regards,
Frans.
--
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

[lfs-support] LFS site down?

[Frans de Boer]

Can't reach the LFS site. There is no report, so I assume that the site 
is down. How long will that last?


Regards,
Frans.
--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Booting LFS with systemd

[Frans de Boer]

On 16-06-18 22:13, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 29-05-18 08:39, Frans de Boer wrote:
First of all I apologize for the initial flood of messages. They where 
the result of multiple tries to get the message to the list in the 
first place. Only yesterday I found that LFS is - still - not handling 
TLS while my server had the line that is must encrypt messages. Of the 
many subjects I exchange messages with, LFS is the only one not 
supporting TLS covered traffic.


Now on subject: I will look into that matter, but normal production 
systems have the same message and do not fail.

I'll keep you informed.

Regards,
Frans.


On 29-05-18 06:43, Michael Shell wrote:

On Thu, 24 May 2018 16:21:53 +0200
Frans de Boer  wrote:


Attached is a picture with a repeatably failing boot when I build LFS
with systemd support. Any suggestion where I screwed-up?



   Frans,

A few lines before the crash, your systemd errored with:

"failed to insert module 'autofs4': No such file or directory"

That might have triggered the abort a few lines later.

Here:

https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-general-1/boot-problem-failed-to-insert-module-%27autofs4%27-4175485121/ 



they suggest recompiling the kernel with

CONFIG_AUTOFS4_FS=y

(under "Kernel automounter version 4 support (also supports v3)" in the
File systems config section) i.e., built-in rather than as a module.

If that does not fix it, see here for how to use gdb on the systemd
core dump to see the sequence of events that led to the downfall:

https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=883690

and post the bt output for us to see. In anycase, if you resolve
the problem, do post to the list what the answer turned out to be.


   Cheers,

   Mike Shell



Hello, it has taken some time before I could follow-up the given 
suggestion. To no avail as expected. The error message about autofs4 has 
vanished, but the rest remains. So, still no solution.


As for the output of the gdb bt command, I need to rebuild all again and 
skip the removal of debug information. I will start this this evening, 
so hopefully I have some more info tomorrow.


Regards,
Frans.


Alas, keeping debugging symbols did not work. I still get the message 
"no debug symbols found" and as a reaction to the bt command "no stack".


I probably doing something wrong, but what can it be?

Regards,
Frans.
--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Booting LFS with systemd

[Frans de Boer]

On 29-05-18 08:39, Frans de Boer wrote:
First of all I apologize for the initial flood of messages. They where 
the result of multiple tries to get the message to the list in the first 
place. Only yesterday I found that LFS is - still - not handling TLS 
while my server had the line that is must encrypt messages. Of the many 
subjects I exchange messages with, LFS is the only one not supporting 
TLS covered traffic.


Now on subject: I will look into that matter, but normal production 
systems have the same message and do not fail.

I'll keep you informed.

Regards,
Frans.


On 29-05-18 06:43, Michael Shell wrote:

On Thu, 24 May 2018 16:21:53 +0200
Frans de Boer  wrote:


Attached is a picture with a repeatably failing boot when I build LFS
with systemd support. Any suggestion where I screwed-up?



   Frans,

A few lines before the crash, your systemd errored with:

"failed to insert module 'autofs4': No such file or directory"

That might have triggered the abort a few lines later.

Here:

https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-general-1/boot-problem-failed-to-insert-module-%27autofs4%27-4175485121/ 



they suggest recompiling the kernel with

CONFIG_AUTOFS4_FS=y

(under "Kernel automounter version 4 support (also supports v3)" in the
File systems config section) i.e., built-in rather than as a module.

If that does not fix it, see here for how to use gdb on the systemd
core dump to see the sequence of events that led to the downfall:

https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=883690

and post the bt output for us to see. In anycase, if you resolve
the problem, do post to the list what the answer turned out to be.


   Cheers,

   Mike Shell



Hello, it has taken some time before I could follow-up the given 
suggestion. To no avail as expected. The error message about autofs4 has 
vanished, but the rest remains. So, still no solution.


As for the output of the gdb bt command, I need to rebuild all again and 
skip the removal of debug information. I will start this this evening, 
so hopefully I have some more info tomorrow.


Regards,
Frans.
--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Booting LFS with systemd

[Frans de Boer]

First of all I apologize for the initial flood of messages. They where 
the result of multiple tries to get the message to the list in the first 
place. Only yesterday I found that LFS is - still - not handling TLS 
while my server had the line that is must encrypt messages. Of the many 
subjects I exchange messages with, LFS is the only one not supporting 
TLS covered traffic.


Now on subject: I will look into that matter, but normal production 
systems have the same message and do not fail.

I'll keep you informed.

Regards,
Frans.


On 29-05-18 06:43, Michael Shell wrote:

On Thu, 24 May 2018 16:21:53 +0200
Frans de Boer  wrote:


Attached is a picture with a repeatably failing boot when I build LFS
with systemd support. Any suggestion where I screwed-up?



   Frans,

A few lines before the crash, your systemd errored with:

"failed to insert module 'autofs4': No such file or directory"

That might have triggered the abort a few lines later.

Here:

https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-general-1/boot-problem-failed-to-insert-module-%27autofs4%27-4175485121/

they suggest recompiling the kernel with

CONFIG_AUTOFS4_FS=y

(under "Kernel automounter version 4 support (also supports v3)" in the
File systems config section) i.e., built-in rather than as a module.

If that does not fix it, see here for how to use gdb on the systemd
core dump to see the sequence of events that led to the downfall:

https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=883690

and post the bt output for us to see. In anycase, if you resolve
the problem, do post to the list what the answer turned out to be.


   Cheers,

   Mike Shell



--
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

[lfs-support] Booting LFS with systemd

[Frans de Boer]

Dear all,

Attached was a picture with a repeatably failing boot when I build LFS 
with systemd support. Any suggestion where I screwed-up?


This is already like the introduction of systemd-238.

Regards, Frans.


Since pictures are not allowed:
The output ends with:
systemd[1]: Detected virtualization vw-other
systemd[1]: Detected architecture x86_64
systemd[1]: Caught , dumped core at pid 39
systemd[1}: Freezing execution
it then continues with three lines about the clocksource and it is frozen.
--
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

[lfs-support] Booting LFS with systemd

[Frans de Boer]

Dear all,

Attached was a picture with a repeatably failing boot when I build LFS 
with systemd support. Any suggestion where I screwed-up?


This is already like the introduction of systemd-238.

Regards, Frans.


Since pictures are not allowed:
The output ends with:
systemd[1]: Detected virtualization vw-other
systemd[1]: Detected architecture x86_64
systemd[1]: Caught , dumped core at pid 39
systemd[1}: Freezing execution
it then continues with three lines about the clocksource and it is frozen.
--
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

[lfs-support] Booting LFS with systemd

[Frans de Boer]

Dear all,

Attached is a picture with a repeatably failing boot when I build LFS 
with systemd support. Any suggestion where I screwed-up?


This is already like the introduction of systemd-238.

Regards, Frans.
-- 
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

[lfs-support] Booting LFS with systemd

[Frans de Boer]

Dear all,

Attached was a picture with a repeatably failing boot when I build LFS 
with systemd support. Any suggestion where I screwed-up?


This is already like the introduction of systemd-238.

Regards, Frans.


Since pictures are not allowed:
The output ends with:
systemd[1]: Detected virtualization vw-other
systemd[1]: Detected architecture x86_64
systemd[1]: Caught , dumped core at pid 39
systemd[1}: Freezing execution
it then continues with three lines about the clocksource and it is frozen.
--
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

[lfs-support] Booting LFS with systemd

[Frans de Boer]

Dear all,

Attached was a picture with a repeatably failing boot when I build LFS 
with systemd support. Any suggestion where I screwed-up?


This is already like the introduction of systemd-238.

Regards, Frans.


Since pictures are not allowed:
The output ends with:
systemd[1]: Detected virtualization vw-other
systemd[1]: Detected architecture x86_64
systemd[1]: Caught , dumped core at pid 39
systemd[1}: Freezing execution
it then continues with three lines about the clocksource and it is frozen.
--
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

[lfs-support] systemd compile error

[Frans de Boer]

LS,

Now that the issue of the undocumented two dots in the meson command 
line are clear, I encountered the next error:


Meson encountered an error in file src/resolve/meson.build, line 178, 
column 10:

Expecting rbracket got eof.
tests += [
 ^^

Any suggestion?

Regards,
Frans.
--
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

[lfs-support] Insecure email communication

[Frans de Boer]

LS,

I just had to downgrade my email security in order to be able to send 
messages to the list. Just because the email server used for the list 
does not support TLS. It's 2018, and no TLS support?


Hope that linuxfromscratch gets an security upgrade soon.

Regards,
Frans.
--
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

[lfs-support] systemd configuration

[Frans de Boer]

Chapter 6.53 contains the following instruction:

LANG=en_US.UTF-8   \
meson --prefix=/usr\
  --sysconfdir=/etc\
  --localstatedir=/var \
  -Dblkid=true \
  -Dbuildtype=release  \
  -Ddefault-dnssec=no  \
  -Dfirstboot=false\
  -Dinstall-tests=false\
  -Dkill-path=/bin/kill\
  -Dkmod-path=/bin/kmod\
  -Dldconfig=false \
  -Dmount-path=/bin/mount  \
  -Drootprefix=\
  -Drootlibdir=/lib\
  -Dsplit-usr=true \
  -Dsulogin-path=/sbin/sulogin \
  -Dsysusers=false \
  -Dumount-path=/bin/umount\
  -Db_lto=false\
  ..

So, what is comming after the two dots?

Regards,
Frans.
--
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

[lfs-support] systemd configuration and meson

[Frans de Boer]

Chapter 6.53 contains the following instruction:

LANG=en_US.UTF-8   \
meson --prefix=/usr\
  --sysconfdir=/etc\
  --localstatedir=/var \
  -Dblkid=true \
  -Dbuildtype=release  \
  -Ddefault-dnssec=no  \
  -Dfirstboot=false\
  -Dinstall-tests=false\
  -Dkill-path=/bin/kill\
  -Dkmod-path=/bin/kmod\
  -Dldconfig=false \
  -Dmount-path=/bin/mount  \
  -Drootprefix=\
  -Drootlibdir=/lib\
  -Dsplit-usr=true \
  -Dsulogin-path=/sbin/sulogin \
  -Dsysusers=false \
  -Dumount-path=/bin/umount\
  -Db_lto=false\
  ..

So, what is comming after the two dots?

2e, what is meson doing there? I get the message "Neither directory 
contains a build file meson.build." while trying to build systemd.

Or is it the case that I need to download a modified systemd tarball again?

Regards,
Frans.
--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Completed, only /lib or /lib64

[Frans de Boer]

On 22-04-17 22:30, Ken Moffat wrote:

On Sat, Apr 22, 2017 at 09:49:25PM +0200, Frans de Boer wrote:

Ok, my mistake: lib64 contains some links, I found out how to eliminate the
use of lib64 at all.

 From your next paragraph, you eliminated the use of lib.


The case of using lib64 instead of lib required some more work since many
packages use hard-coded references to lib. Since the FHS does not mandate
the use of lib - it's in fact optional if using lib64/32 - I tried to find a
way to create a system without the use of lib, but instead use lib64 or
lib32 only. In that way the system is aware again of its architecture
instead of using the antiquated - but historical grown - lib directory.
No worry, the architectural independent /var/lib is still there.

--- Frans.


If you are building on biarch multilib, lib32 instead of lib may
have some merit and lib64 is presumably required.

But on x86_64 I do not think many people need multilib, and you lose
the benefit of 99% of packages which use a lib directory defaulting
to lib.  I suppose you put --libdir=something and -m32 or -m64 in
some standard variables when you compile.


Using --libdir=  is only a very small part of the solution.


On systems which are not multilib, it seems a lot of trouble to go
to.  And I don't think your system has awareness of anything, but
you as the sysadmin may find it helps to know whether it is 32-bit
or 64-bit.  I guess that depends on how many systems you are trying
to keep track of ;-)

I've now essentially stopped building 32-bit, but for some years I
did build both x86_64 and some i686 in LFS - and my buildscripts
didn't need to care about the libdir name.  Except for nss, I think.

Your system, your rules.  Enjoy it.

ĸen

Hm, I understand, I think. If most people jump into the water it must be 
save to do the same? I do like to have my system being aware of its 
architecture. What if we move to 96- or 128-bit systems? Are we still 
using the antiquated lib naming scheme?


Also, 32-bit software is still being used in older servers but also in 
home appliances who nowadays look much more like micro-computers running 
some flavor of linux or the likes. We have come a long way since the 
4/8-bit era, but 32-bit is still heavily in use.


--- Frans
--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Completed, only /lib or /lib64

[Frans de Boer]

On 22-04-17 17:54, Bruce Dubbs wrote:

Frans de Boer wrote:

Dear Reader,

The current instance of LFS-dev still requires the use of /lib64 (as a
link to /lib).


No it does not.  /lib64 is a directory, not a symlink.  It contains
exactly two files, both symbolic links:

$ ls -l /lib64
total 0
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 27 Feb 13 19:28 ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 ->
../lib/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 27 Feb 13 19:28 ld-lsb-x86-64.so.3 ->
../lib/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2

If have made changes to eliminate the use of the /lib64

link. Also, all relevant hard-coded references to /lib64 in the used
packages are replaced with /lib. The only place I did not touched sofar,
where the manuals and documentation. Oh, I did this for both developments
(vinit and systemd).


When we released 8.0 we checked that nothing was installed in /usr/lib64
or, except for the above, nothing else in /lib64.

You need to explain a little better what you see as the issue.

  -- Bruce



Likewise, instead of using /lib I targeted the use of /lib64 without the
use of a symbolic link /lib. That took some more time, but the part using
only vinit is now ready and booting and more importantly, working.
Systemd
needs some tweaking, but given available time, that has to wait a little
longer.

By the way, to do it right, one needs changes in the toolchain (crucial)
as well in the next stage.

If interested, I can extract all additions and provide them to be
included
in some future development cycle.
I also sure that some commands can be more integrated and/or refined, but
that is a next step.

Kind Regards,
Frans.


Ok, my mistake: lib64 contains some links, I found out how to eliminate 
the use of lib64 at all.


The case of using lib64 instead of lib required some more work since 
many packages use hard-coded references to lib. Since the FHS does not 
mandate the use of lib - it's in fact optional if using lib64/32 - I 
tried to find a way to create a system without the use of lib, but 
instead use lib64 or lib32 only. In that way the system is aware again 
of its architecture instead of using the antiquated - but historical 
grown - lib directory.

No worry, the architectural independent /var/lib is still there.

--- Frans.
--
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

Re: [lfs-support] flex-2.6.3

[Frans de Boer]

On 16-02-17 23:18, Bruce Dubbs wrote:

Frans de Boer wrote:

Building flex-2.6.3 does not work because configure is not yet generated.
Running autogen.sh usually solves this, but there are no autotools
installed yet.

Any one else?


When I look at the tarball, configure is there.

md5sum: a5f65570cd9107ec8a8ec88f17b31bb1

  -- Bruce



Found it!
I downloaded the file under "source code" which gave me 
flex-2.6.3.tar.gz, instead I should have downloaded the file under the 
label "flex-2.6.3.tar.gz". Confusing :\


Frans.
--
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

Re: [lfs-support] flex-2.6.3

[Frans de Boer]

On 16-02-17 23:18, Bruce Dubbs wrote:

Frans de Boer wrote:

Building flex-2.6.3 does not work because configure is not yet generated.
Running autogen.sh usually solves this, but there are no autotools
installed yet.

Any one else?


When I look at the tarball, configure is there.

md5sum: a5f65570cd9107ec8a8ec88f17b31bb1

  -- Bruce


When I download the tarball from 
'https://github.com/westes/flex/releases', it's not there (anymore). 
Only configure.ac is there.


Frans.
--
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

[lfs-support] flex-2.6.3

[Frans de Boer]

Building flex-2.6.3 does not work because configure is not yet 
generated. Running autogen.sh usually solves this, but there are no 
autotools installed yet.


Any one else?

Regards, Frans.
--
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

Re: [lfs-support] New directory layout and FHS 3.0

[Frans de Boer]

On 29-12-16 07:59, Hazel Russman wrote:

On Wed, 28 Dec 2016 23:47:45 +0100
Frans de Boer <fr...@fransdb.nl> wrote:


I have said that I will forward some patches to get rid of the
[...]/lib64 notions after I have tested my older patches against the
newest sources.

I have created several source code changes and tested them, only to find
out that glibc, gcc, libcap and perl have at some places hard coded the
path to [...]/lib64 if an x86_64 machine is detected. I can change most
of it with good result.

Still I do not send the changes yet because I am more and more convinced
that on machines with multiarch capabilities one should always use a
qualifier in the directory name for libraries.
Now, LFS is about teaching others how to start building your own
operating system and minimal support utilities. The project started out
in the era of 32-bit machines, adopted the 64-bit machine on the fly by
use of links to legacy library directories who's naming is no longer
discriminatory any more. What if we slip into the 128-bit (or +64-bit)
era? Still using the legacy [...]/lib notion?
The mail list has already many questions about the naming, maybe time to
step into the current reality?

Looking at production machines, with current UNIX and Linux
distributions, many of them are already using a schema which
differentiate already between bit sizes.
Currently, I have a conversation on the FHS mailing list of due to the
ambiguous nature of qualifiers.

A snippet from the latest mail exchange:
That said, I can appreciate also the idea that on hardware capable of
handling multiple architectures - read size of data paths - you always
use qualifiers, regardless if only one or multiple library directories
are used. So my previous second proposal is then augmented into:

   [/usr[/local]]/lib for each different set of libraries

For compatibility one should also add
   [/usr/[/local]]/lib -> [/usr[/local]]/lib
   Where .../lib links to the library directory supporting the native bit
   size.

This implies that on 32-bit intel like systems, you always have a
[...]/lib32 directory, an optional [...]/lib16 and [...]/lib is a link
to [...]/lib32.
On 64-bit Intel like systems you have [...]/lib64, an optional
[...]/lib<32|16> and [...]/lib is a link to [...]/lib64.

The above schema is already in widespread use on 64-bit machines, with
the exception of the legacy use of [...]/lib for 32-bit library directories.
Also, modification of sources for glibc, gcc, libcap, perl etc, are not
needed anymore. Due to the fact that some of these packages are core
packages and it would require a lot of effort for the maintainers to
change their current hard coded assumptions into more flexible code.
---

I wait to see where this all is going before I decide what to do with
the current patches. Note that there are more patches required then
currently given in the LFS development branch.

Regards, Frans.



Will this change do away with the very annoying screens of warning messages 
from package libtool scripts about libraries seemingly having moved? I'm sure 
I'm not the only person who finds them off-putting.

As far as I have seen, they only appear when creating the target 
binaries. So it is just a minor issue, I guess. But to give a straight 
answer to your question: I don't know yet. I will change the layout 
(again) and test everything. I don't expect any difficulty or bump since 
the proposed layout is very similar to what was used under LFS. The only 
real change is that links and directories switch contents.


We should also not forget to preserve the purpose of LFS in the first 
place. A means to get familiar of building a own Linux OS. There is - in 
my view - a need to get closer to real world examples and therefor be 
done with library directory names originating from the 16/32-bit era.


--- Frans.
--
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

Re: [lfs-support] New directory layout and FHS 3.0

[Frans de Boer]

On 21-12-16 17:48, Bruce Dubbs wrote:

Frans de Boer wrote:

On 20-12-16 23:02, Bruce Dubbs wrote:

Frans de Boer wrote:

On 20-12-16 21:56, Bruce Dubbs wrote:

Frans de Boer wrote:

Hi all,

I just noticed that there are changes in the development version of
LFS,
related to x86_64 architecture. But i do miss the rationale and/or
more
explanation. The latter is important because I see several changes
which
make sense, but misses other related changes in various other
packages.
Also having now /lib64 as a directory instead of a link puzzles
me. The
more because /lib is still a directory and not a link to /lib64 as
per
FHS
3.0.


Where does FHS 3.0 say a symlink is required?

What additional explanation would you suggest and where should it be?


Looking at the FHS 3.0 documentation does not help either since
the new
LFS directory structure seems to be a non-consistent mix of various
possibilities. See above and next example: /usr/lib with redundant
link
/usr/lib64.


4.8. /usr/lib : Alternate format libraries (optional)

does not seem to require /usr/lib64.



Footnote 13 makes an implicit reference to it. But I admit, it's not a
very strong point.

However, it seems not consistent to have /usr/lib and in the root
/lib64.
Use of qualifiers is - as I read it - only meant to be use by
multi-library systems, which LFS explicitly states currently that it
is not.


That's right, but there are apps that hard code some assumptions so
/lib64 with its two symlinks is a workaround.  If we could reliably
remove it, we would.


Also, I never implied that having /lib64 does require /usr/lib64 -
simply
because there is no hard relation between them or their content. It's
just
what I stated above, inconsistent use of qualifiers.


OK, but we do't need /usr/lib64 and not having it makes things easier
for us (for the most part).


By the way: Having /lib64 and /usr/lib64 as links to their
respective lib
directory make sense only when using third party (binary) packages.


Agree for the most part.  Some packages require a patch to avoid the
need and finding where the changes are needed is often difficult.


Finally on the matter of explanation: sure, I can write one and find a
place to put it up. But we first need to get into the "inconsistency"
issue to be able to make a coherent and justifiable explanation.


As I said, it is a workaround.  I'd prefer that it was not needed.

Even with our changes, look at the adjsuting page in Chapter 6:

echo 'int main(){}' > dummy.c
cc dummy.c -v -Wl,--verbose &> dummy.log
readelf -l a.out | grep ': /lib'

  [Requesting program interpreter: /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2]

I'm not sure if that /lib64 is in glibc or binutils (probably glibc),
but it would need to be fixed to remove /lib64.



I will send the needed patches I made in the past for other packages.
Thus
eliminating the need in LFS for qualified library directories.

I have, however, not used those for some time, which needs therefor some
(re)testing. Due to the coming holidays, I guess I can send them in
sometime next week (to the bug-list?).


We can review these packages whenever you send them, but we will want to
be careful as we get ready for the next (8.0) release.

  -- Bruce


I have said that I will forward some patches to get rid of the 
[...]/lib64 notions after I have tested my older patches against the 
newest sources.


I have created several source code changes and tested them, only to find 
out that glibc, gcc, libcap and perl have at some places hard coded the 
path to [...]/lib64 if an x86_64 machine is detected. I can change most 
of it with good result.


Still I do not send the changes yet because I am more and more convinced 
that on machines with multiarch capabilities one should always use a 
qualifier in the directory name for libraries.
Now, LFS is about teaching others how to start building your own 
operating system and minimal support utilities. The project started out 
in the era of 32-bit machines, adopted the 64-bit machine on the fly by 
use of links to legacy library directories who's naming is no longer 
discriminatory any more. What if we slip into the 128-bit (or +64-bit) 
era? Still using the legacy [...]/lib notion?
The mail list has already many questions about the naming, maybe time to 
step into the current reality?


Looking at production machines, with current UNIX and Linux 
distributions, many of them are already using a schema which 
differentiate already between bit sizes.
Currently, I have a conversation on the FHS mailing list of due to the 
ambiguous nature of qualifiers.


A snippet from the latest mail exchange:
That said, I can appreciate also the idea that on hardware capable of 
handling multiple architectures - read size of data paths - you always 
use qualifiers, regardless if only one or multiple library directories 
are used. So my previous second proposal is then augmented into:


  [/usr[/local]]/lib for each different set of libraries

F

Re: [lfs-support] New directory layout and FHS 3.0

[Frans de Boer]

On 20-12-16 23:02, Bruce Dubbs wrote:

Frans de Boer wrote:

On 20-12-16 21:56, Bruce Dubbs wrote:

Frans de Boer wrote:

Hi all,

I just noticed that there are changes in the development version of
LFS,
related to x86_64 architecture. But i do miss the rationale and/or more
explanation. The latter is important because I see several changes
which
make sense, but misses other related changes in various other packages.
Also having now /lib64 as a directory instead of a link puzzles me. The
more because /lib is still a directory and not a link to /lib64 as per
FHS
3.0.


Where does FHS 3.0 say a symlink is required?

What additional explanation would you suggest and where should it be?


Looking at the FHS 3.0 documentation does not help either since the new
LFS directory structure seems to be a non-consistent mix of various
possibilities. See above and next example: /usr/lib with redundant link
/usr/lib64.


4.8. /usr/lib : Alternate format libraries (optional)

does not seem to require /usr/lib64.



Footnote 13 makes an implicit reference to it. But I admit, it's not a
very strong point.

However, it seems not consistent to have /usr/lib and in the root /lib64.
Use of qualifiers is - as I read it - only meant to be use by
multi-library systems, which LFS explicitly states currently that it
is not.


That's right, but there are apps that hard code some assumptions so
/lib64 with its two symlinks is a workaround.  If we could reliably
remove it, we would.


Also, I never implied that having /lib64 does require /usr/lib64 - simply
because there is no hard relation between them or their content. It's
just
what I stated above, inconsistent use of qualifiers.


OK, but we do't need /usr/lib64 and not having it makes things easier
for us (for the most part).


By the way: Having /lib64 and /usr/lib64 as links to their respective lib
directory make sense only when using third party (binary) packages.


Agree for the most part.  Some packages require a patch to avoid the
need and finding where the changes are needed is often difficult.


Finally on the matter of explanation: sure, I can write one and find a
place to put it up. But we first need to get into the "inconsistency"
issue to be able to make a coherent and justifiable explanation.


As I said, it is a workaround.  I'd prefer that it was not needed.

Even with our changes, look at the adjsuting page in Chapter 6:

echo 'int main(){}' > dummy.c
cc dummy.c -v -Wl,--verbose &> dummy.log
readelf -l a.out | grep ': /lib'

  [Requesting program interpreter: /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2]

I'm not sure if that /lib64 is in glibc or binutils (probably glibc),
but it would need to be fixed to remove /lib64.

  -- Bruce
I will send the needed patches I made in the past for other packages. 
Thus eliminating the need in LFS for qualified library directories.


I have, however, not used those for some time, which needs therefor some 
(re)testing. Due to the coming holidays, I guess I can send them in 
sometime next week (to the bug-list?).


--- Frans.
--
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

Re: [lfs-support] New directory layout and FHS 3.0

[Frans de Boer]

On 20-12-16 21:56, Bruce Dubbs wrote:

Frans de Boer wrote:

Hi all,

I just noticed that there are changes in the development version of LFS,
related to x86_64 architecture. But i do miss the rationale and/or more
explanation. The latter is important because I see several changes which
make sense, but misses other related changes in various other packages.
Also having now /lib64 as a directory instead of a link puzzles me. The
more because /lib is still a directory and not a link to /lib64 as per
FHS
3.0.


Where does FHS 3.0 say a symlink is required?

What additional explanation would you suggest and where should it be?


Looking at the FHS 3.0 documentation does not help either since the new
LFS directory structure seems to be a non-consistent mix of various
possibilities. See above and next example: /usr/lib with redundant link
/usr/lib64.


4.8. /usr/lib : Alternate format libraries (optional)

does not seem to require /usr/lib64.

  -- Bruce


Footnote 13 makes an implicit reference to it. But I admit, it's not a 
very strong point.


However, it seems not consistent to have /usr/lib and in the root 
/lib64. Use of qualifiers is - as I read it - only meant to be use by 
multi-library systems, which LFS explicitly states currently that it is not.


Also, I never implied that having /lib64 does require /usr/lib64 - 
simply because there is no hard relation between them or their content. 
It's just what I stated above, inconsistent use of qualifiers.


By the way: Having /lib64 and /usr/lib64 as links to their respective 
lib directory make sense only when using third party (binary) packages.


Finally on the matter of explanation: sure, I can write one and find a 
place to put it up. But we first need to get into the "inconsistency" 
issue to be able to make a coherent and justifiable explanation.


--- Frans.


--
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

[lfs-support] New directory layout and FHS 3.0

[Frans de Boer]

Hi all,

I just noticed that there are changes in the development version of LFS, 
related to x86_64 architecture. But i do miss the rationale and/or more 
explanation. The latter is important because I see several changes which 
make sense, but misses other related changes in various other packages. 
Also having now /lib64 as a directory instead of a link puzzles me. The 
more because /lib is still a directory and not a link to /lib64 as per 
FHS 3.0.


Looking at the FHS 3.0 documentation does not help either since the new 
LFS directory structure seems to be a non-consistent mix of various 
possibilities. See above and next example: /usr/lib with redundant link 
/usr/lib64.


Also glad to see that what I proposed in 2014 is now taking shape.
--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Error systemd

[Frans de Boer]

On 07-12-16 09:07, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 06-12-16 23:21, Douglas R. Reno wrote:

Frans de Boer wrote:

While building systemd-232, I encounter the next errors during
installing:

mv: cannot stat '/usr/lib/libnss_myhostname.so.2': No such file or
directory
mv: cannot stat '/usr/lib/libnss_mymachines.so.2': No such file or
directory
mv: cannot stat '/usr/lib/libnss_resolve.so.2': No such file or
directory
root:/sources-lfs# find / -iname libnss_resolve.so.2
/lib/libnss_resolve.so.2

As one can see, the libraries are not in /usr/lib, rather they are in
/lib. Has this been overlooked or am I the only one? In which case I
have to hunt deeper.

Regards, Frans.

What version of the book are you building?

We don't have those commands in the LFS page currently. I haven't
checked BLFS as I wasn't the one who did that page, yet.

Those are now installed in /lib by default so that the NSS service in
Glibc can pick them up without extra hassle.


Except for the last two lines, those are not my commands. They seem to
come from the make install command aka Makefile.

As I stated, it is the development version and implies systemd-232. All
according to the book.
I know that it is placed into /lib and not /usr/lib. Is something gone
wrong during the creation of the LFS specific systemd?

I will examine the Makefile(s?) myself.

--- Frans
Oeps, I feel stupid :\, yesterday checked it and today againonly to 
find that the mv command where a leftover of previous systemd build 
chain. It was right under the install command and I did not see that before.


Sorry for my sloppiness.
--- Frans

--
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

Re: [lfs-support] Error systemd

[Frans de Boer]

On 06-12-16 23:21, Douglas R. Reno wrote:

Frans de Boer wrote:

While building systemd-232, I encounter the next errors during
installing:

mv: cannot stat '/usr/lib/libnss_myhostname.so.2': No such file or
directory
mv: cannot stat '/usr/lib/libnss_mymachines.so.2': No such file or
directory
mv: cannot stat '/usr/lib/libnss_resolve.so.2': No such file or directory
root:/sources-lfs# find / -iname libnss_resolve.so.2
/lib/libnss_resolve.so.2

As one can see, the libraries are not in /usr/lib, rather they are in
/lib. Has this been overlooked or am I the only one? In which case I
have to hunt deeper.

Regards, Frans.

What version of the book are you building?

We don't have those commands in the LFS page currently. I haven't
checked BLFS as I wasn't the one who did that page, yet.

Those are now installed in /lib by default so that the NSS service in
Glibc can pick them up without extra hassle.

Except for the last two lines, those are not my commands. They seem to 
come from the make install command aka Makefile.


As I stated, it is the development version and implies systemd-232. All 
according to the book.
I know that it is placed into /lib and not /usr/lib. Is something gone 
wrong during the creation of the LFS specific systemd?


I will examine the Makefile(s?) myself.

--- Frans
--
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