Re: [blfs-support] Iced Tea again!!!!!
m...@pc-networking-services.com wrote: Well I have managed to get iced tea to successfully compile on a systemd system. Good. If who ever is in charge of the fixed-paths patch is willing to do so, the changes that need to be made to ALL of the Defs-utils.gmk locations is: HEAD = $(UTILS_USR_BIN)head UNZIP = $(UTILS_USR_BIN_PATH)unzip UNZIPSFX = $(UTILS_USR_BIN_PATH)unzipsfx ZIPEXE = $(UTILS_USR_BIN_PATH)zip FIND = $(UTILS_USR_BIN_PATH)find TOUCH = $(UTILS_USR_BIN_PATH)touch I have not made changes to patches before and do not want at this stage to attempt to do so. Also I have no idea if the changes to these PATH commands will break a non-systemd installation. The reason it did not complete the compilation after I had changed Defs-utils.gmk the first time is that I had done so only in the open-jdk-boot/jdk/common/shared directory, and it seems to revert back to calling /bin/find at another point of the compilation. Is 'find' on your system not in /bin? It is in the standard LFS. In checking, I don't know why the instructions to move it to /bin were removed form the systemd version or the book. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-support] Iced Tea again!!!!!
On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 01:01:18PM +1300, m...@pc-networking-services.com wrote: Hello, Well this is ridiculous. I have reached the point after a few days of installing the systemd 7.5 version of LFS, and going through the configuration of quite a number of other packages following BLFS 7.5 stable to the point of having a working graphical interface, so decide now is a good time to install java again. I set everything up as per the instructions, which I did when I first set it up following the previous version of LFS. This time round though I can NOT even get the blasted thing to compile. I have even reverted back to the iced tea 2.4.1 and get EXACTLY the same message. Please note that in between changing the versions I have deleted the files for the CURRENT 7.5 stable version. The only thing that I did not do was to delete /usr/share/java before extracting the earlier binary and supporting files. BOOT_JAR_CMD = /opt/icedtea-2.4.1/bootstrap/jdk1.6.0/bin/jar BOOT_JARSIGNER_CMD = /opt/icedtea-2.4.1/bootstrap/jdk1.6.0/bin/jarsigner JAVAC_CMD = JAVAH_CMD = JAVADOC_CMD = Build Platform Settings: USER = root PLATFORM = linux ARCH = i586 LIBARCH = i386 ARCH_FAMILY = i586 ARCH_DATA_MODEL = 32 ARCHPROP = i386 ALSA_VERSION = 1.0.27.2 OS_VERSION = 3.13.3 [requires at least 2.6] OS_VARIANT_NAME = Linux From Scratch OS_VARIANT_VERSION = 7.5-systemd MB_OF_MEMORY = 1504 GNU Make Settings: MAKE = /usr/bin/make MAKECMDGOALS = sanity MAKEFLAGS = w SHELL = /bin/sh Target Build Versions: JDK_VERSION = 1.7.0_40External File/Binary Locations: USRJDKINSTANCES_PATH = /opt/java BUILD_JDK_IMPORT_PATH = /NOT-SET/re/jdk/1.7.0_40/promoted/latest/binaries ALT_BUILD_JDK_IMPORT_PATH = JDK_IMPORT_PATH = /opt/icedtea-2.4.1/bootstrap/jdk1.6.0 ALT_JDK_IMPORT_PATH = /opt/icedtea-2.4.1/bootstrap/jdk1.6.0 LANGTOOLS_DIST = ALT_LANGTOOLS_DIST = /opt/icedtea-2.4.1/openjdk.build-boot/langtools/dist CORBA_DIST = ALT_CORBA_DIST = /opt/icedtea-2.4.1/openjdk.build-boot/corba/dist JAXP_DIST = ALT_JAXP_DIST = /opt/icedtea-2.4.1/openjdk.build-boot/jaxp/dist JAXWS_DIST = ALT_JAXWS_DIST = /opt/icedtea-2.4.1/openjdk.build-boot/jaxws/dist HOTSPOT_DOCS_IMPORT_PATH = /NO_DOCS_DIR ALT_HOTSPOT_DOCS_IMPORT_PATH = HOTSPOT_IMPORT_PATH = /opt/icedtea-2.4.1/openjdk.build-boot/hotspot/import ALT_HOTSPOT_IMPORT_PATH = /opt/icedtea-2.4.1/openjdk.build-boot/hotspot/import HOTSPOT_CLIENT_PATH = /opt/icedtea-2.4.1/openjdk.build-boot/hotspot/import/jre/lib/i386/client ALT_HOTSPOT_CLIENT_PATH = HOTSPOT_SERVER_PATH = /opt/icedtea-2.4.1/openjdk.build-boot/hotspot/import/jre/lib/i386/server ALT_HOTSPOT_SERVER_PATH = CACERTS_FILE = ./../src/share/lib/security/cacerts ALT_CACERTS_FILE = CUPS_HEADERS_PATH = /usr/include ALT_CUPS_HEADERS_PATH = OpenJDK-specific settings: FREETYPE_HEADERS_PATH = /usr/include ALT_FREETYPE_HEADERS_PATH = FREETYPE_LIB_PATH = /usr/lib ALT_FREETYPE_LIB_PATH = Previous JDK Settings: PREVIOUS_RELEASE_PATH = USING-PREVIOUS_RELEASE_IMAGE ALT_PREVIOUS_RELEASE_PATH = PREVIOUS_JDK_VERSION = 1.6.0 ALT_PREVIOUS_JDK_VERSION = PREVIOUS_JDK_FILE = ALT_PREVIOUS_JDK_FILE = PREVIOUS_JRE_FILE = ALT_PREVIOUS_JRE_FILE = PREVIOUS_RELEASE_IMAGE = /opt/icedtea-2.4.1/bootstrap/jdk1.6.0 ALT_PREVIOUS_RELEASE_IMAGE = MILESTONE = fcs RELEASE = 1.7.0_40-blfs FULL_VERSION = 1.7.0_40-blfs-b31 BUILD_NUMBER = b31 WARNING: This build does not include running javadoc. WARNING: The version of unzip being used is older than the required version of '5.12'. The version of unzip found was ''. WARNING: The version of zip being used is older than the required version of '2.2'. The version of zip found was ''. ERROR: The version of make being used is older than the required version of '3.81'. The version of make found was ''. ERROR: Your BOOTDIR environment variable does not point to a valid JDK for bootstrapping this build. A JDK 7 Update 40 build must be bootstrapped using JDK 1.6.0 fcs (or later). Apparently, your bootstrap JDK is version Please update your ALT_BOOTDIR setting and start your build again. Exiting because of the above error(s). make/sanity-rules.gmk:71: recipe for target 'post-sanity' failed make[1]: *** [post-sanity] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory '/opt/icedtea-2.4.1/openjdk-boot' Makefile:2465: recipe for target 'stamps/icedtea-boot.stamp' failed make: *** [stamps/icedtea-boot.stamp] Error 2 I went to the icedtea wiki page at: http://icedtea.classpath.org/wiki/CommonIssues and it has the exact message about the ALT_BOOTDIR and it suggested recompiling gcc. I have done this as I needed to add the other languages, so I did the recompile of gcc stock standard per the BLFS book enabling
Re: [blfs-support] Iced Tea again!!!!!
Em 23-03-2014 06:15, m...@pc-networking-services.com escreveu: On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 01:01:18PM +1300, m...@pc-networking-services.com wrote: Hello, Well this is ridiculous. I have reached the point after a few days of installing the systemd 7.5 version of LFS, and going through the configuration of quite a number of other packages following BLFS 7.5 stable to the point of having a working graphical interface, so decide now is a good time to install java again. I set everything up as per the instructions, which I did when I first set it up following the previous version of LFS. This time round though I can NOT even get the blasted thing to compile. I have even reverted back to the iced tea 2.4.1 and get EXACTLY the same message. Please note that in between changing the versions I have deleted the files for the CURRENT 7.5 stable version. The only thing that I did not do was to delete /usr/share/java before extracting the earlier binary and supporting files. Well, I hope that you have really followed the instructions. I'm not particularly familiar with java at the moment, but I've built icedtea-2.4.2 twice - once in October/November, in a general test, once on 7.5 because I overlooked that the old version was invoked from the script :-( and I then built 2.4.5 on 7.5. I've now looked at my last 2.4.2 log, and I see the sort of information you have posted above, just over 4000 lines into the build. In your case, I am worried by the warnings about unzip and zip, and baffled by the error that 'make' seems not to have been found. And after one Error, I think all bets for subsequent messages are off, in the same way that in a compilation failure we have to look at the first error. I assume you haven't run out of disk space, or filled up /tmp ? Rebuilding gcc seems an extreme suggestion (unless someone intends using gcc's java to bootstrap icedtea), so I'm not exactly surprised that it didn't help. But just to be clear : you can still build both C and C++ packages ? For me, the pain of scripting java was in working out what to add to the builder's (for me, that is the big guy, whose username begins with 'r') PATH - and, of course, remembering to set up my own PATH when I actually had to try to use java. Is it possible that you screwed up something in that area ? I find it hard to believe that you could have _lost_ the normal PATH (which would account for the zip, unzip, make messages), because at least in 2.4.2 the first part of the build looks to be a conventional configure which would crap out if /usr/bin was no longer in the PATH. The only other things I might query are whether you correctly installed the binary openjdk, and whether you applied all the icedtea patches ? Oh, and you ought to re-download the current version, because it was a vulnerability fix. In my own script for building icedtea, I set the following before I try to build the BLFS-7.5 version: export JAVA_HOME=/opt/OpenJDK-1.7.0.51-bin export ANT_HOME=/opt/ant export CLASSPATH=/usr/share/java:/usr/share/java/junit-4.11 export PATH=$PATH:/opt/OpenJDK-1.7.0.51-bin/bin:/opt/ant/bin I will hazard a guess that ANT_HOME has not yet come into play when your build fails, but the other parts - with whichever version of the OpenJDK bin you have installed - need to be set appropriately. ĸen -- das eine Mal als Tragödie, dieses Mal als Farce When people are TESTING the versions of the book before making them a release I am having a very hard time believing that what they are doing to compile the package and what they have written that they have done are the exact same things. If they were, then someone such as me who is following through the written instructions and copying and pasting them exactly would be able to make it work from a bare hard drive. This is clearly not the case. I am having a hard time believing that you have followed through the written instructions. When we do that, some times we forget some step. Ken, who was very kind replying above, does copy and paste instructions to update packages, but has all scripted. I always script. Occasionally, I copy and paste. It is a little difficult to try and help someone who explicitly writes not to trust us. If you do not trust us, will you trust our help? Also, if you do not trust us, then you do not trust the book, why then spend so much time building it? Still trying to help, although I do not believe you will trust what I am going to write: the best thing to do is to script. Copy and paste to a script and use it to install. Later, you can check if something was forgotten. -- []s, Fernando -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-support] Iced Tea again!!!!!
Em 23-03-2014 06:15, m...@pc-networking-services.com escreveu: On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 01:01:18PM +1300, m...@pc-networking-services.com wrote: Hello, Well this is ridiculous. I have reached the point after a few days of installing the systemd 7.5 version of LFS, and going through the configuration of quite a number of other packages following BLFS 7.5 stable to the point of having a working graphical interface, so decide now is a good time to install java again. I set everything up as per the instructions, which I did when I first set it up following the previous version of LFS. This time round though I can NOT even get the blasted thing to compile. I have even reverted back to the iced tea 2.4.1 and get EXACTLY the same message. Please note that in between changing the versions I have deleted the files for the CURRENT 7.5 stable version. The only thing that I did not do was to delete /usr/share/java before extracting the earlier binary and supporting files. Well, I hope that you have really followed the instructions. I'm not particularly familiar with java at the moment, but I've built icedtea-2.4.2 twice - once in October/November, in a general test, once on 7.5 because I overlooked that the old version was invoked from the script :-( and I then built 2.4.5 on 7.5. I've now looked at my last 2.4.2 log, and I see the sort of information you have posted above, just over 4000 lines into the build. In your case, I am worried by the warnings about unzip and zip, and baffled by the error that 'make' seems not to have been found. And after one Error, I think all bets for subsequent messages are off, in the same way that in a compilation failure we have to look at the first error. I assume you haven't run out of disk space, or filled up /tmp ? Rebuilding gcc seems an extreme suggestion (unless someone intends using gcc's java to bootstrap icedtea), so I'm not exactly surprised that it didn't help. But just to be clear : you can still build both C and C++ packages ? For me, the pain of scripting java was in working out what to add to the builder's (for me, that is the big guy, whose username begins with 'r') PATH - and, of course, remembering to set up my own PATH when I actually had to try to use java. Is it possible that you screwed up something in that area ? I find it hard to believe that you could have _lost_ the normal PATH (which would account for the zip, unzip, make messages), because at least in 2.4.2 the first part of the build looks to be a conventional configure which would crap out if /usr/bin was no longer in the PATH. The only other things I might query are whether you correctly installed the binary openjdk, and whether you applied all the icedtea patches ? Oh, and you ought to re-download the current version, because it was a vulnerability fix. In my own script for building icedtea, I set the following before I try to build the BLFS-7.5 version: export JAVA_HOME=/opt/OpenJDK-1.7.0.51-bin export ANT_HOME=/opt/ant export CLASSPATH=/usr/share/java:/usr/share/java/junit-4.11 export PATH=$PATH:/opt/OpenJDK-1.7.0.51-bin/bin:/opt/ant/bin I will hazard a guess that ANT_HOME has not yet come into play when your build fails, but the other parts - with whichever version of the OpenJDK bin you have installed - need to be set appropriately. ĸen -- das eine Mal als Tragödie, dieses Mal als Farce When people are TESTING the versions of the book before making them a release I am having a very hard time believing that what they are doing to compile the package and what they have written that they have done are the exact same things. If they were, then someone such as me who is following through the written instructions and copying and pasting them exactly would be able to make it work from a bare hard drive. This is clearly not the case. I am having a hard time believing that you have followed through the written instructions. When we do that, some times we forget some step. Ken, who was very kind replying above, does copy and paste instructions to update packages, but has all scripted. I always script. Occasionally, I copy and paste. It is a little difficult to try and help someone who explicitly writes not to trust us. If you do not trust us, will you trust our help? Also, if you do not trust us, then you do not trust the book, why then spend so much time building it? Still trying to help, although I do not believe you will trust what I am going to write: the best thing to do is to script. Copy and paste to a script and use it to install. Later, you can check if something was forgotten. -- []s, Fernando -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page Hello, I get the point you make Fernando. I am sorry but I have written technical documentation myself for server
Re: [blfs-support] Iced Tea again!!!!!
Le 23/03/2014 10:36, m...@pc-networking-services.com a écrit : On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 01:01:18PM +1300, m...@pc-networking-services.com wrote: Hello, Well this is ridiculous. I have reached the point after a few days of installing the systemd 7.5 version of LFS, and going through the configuration of quite a number of other packages following BLFS 7.5 stable to the point of having a working graphical interface, so decide now is a good time to install java again. I set everything up as per the instructions, which I did when I first set it up following the previous version of LFS. [...] make/sanity-rules.gmk:71: recipe for target 'post-sanity' failed make[1]: *** [post-sanity] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory '/opt/icedtea-2.4.1/openjdk-boot' Makefile:2465: recipe for target 'stamps/icedtea-boot.stamp' failed make: *** [stamps/icedtea-boot.stamp] Error 2 [...] Hello again, I have done some digging around on google and find that this issue was first reported in JULY last year about people compiling on a SYSTEMD system. Please note right through I have stated SYSTEMD. There does not appear to be a SYSTEMD version of BLFS. Which would explain why things are not working as it seems that only ONE developer actually has a systemd version working, In the article I found it states this from, I believe possibly someone who had been involved in developing for LFS/BLFS at the time: Tushar Teredesai | 31 Jul 17:57 2013 Re: compiling java on the systemd lfs branch fails On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 8:59 PM, Nathan Coulson conathan at gmail.com wrote: I guess the two choices would be to move those programs back to /bin in the systemd branch, patch java in the systemd version to not use hardcoded paths, or patch both variations of blfs. When I first compiled jdk for lfs, I had patched their build system to use the program versions from PATH instead of hardcoded locations. The patch may have been dropped at some point. This flexibility of using commands from the path is useful for lfsers who have their homegrown package manager which replaces the standard file copy/move commands with their own logging versions. --Tushar. Now I need to ask, where is this patch? I need java working and I need the patch. The link to the BLFS-Dev where this was posted is: http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lfs.beyond.devel/24299 I see that Bruce, who seems to still be actively involved did not like the suggestion of sym-linking, so now I am left with a system that can not be completed as the INSTRUCTIONS are lacking and incorrect for a SYSTEMD system. Regards, Christopher. Hi Christopher, I understand your frustration, but nobody is in charge of a systemd BLFS version, so you are on your own building BLFS above LFS-systemd. For the issues you have, you may have a look at: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/patches/downloads/openjdk/openjdk-6-b10-remove_fixed_paths-1.patch as well as the current: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/patches/downloads/icedtea/icedtea-2.4.5-fixed_paths-1.patch You could also try to see where the various XXX_YYY_PATH variables are defined and change them to all begin with /usr. Pierre -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-support] Iced Tea again!!!!!
Le 23/03/2014 18:10, Ken Moffat a écrit : [long thread] I'm surprised that this now appears to be a systemd issue - I had assumed that all the pain there would be in replacing bootscripts. But, the links in other posts seem to bear that out. So, you should probably look at other distros using systemd - probably fedora and arch will be your best bets - to see if there is anything relevant there. Links in : http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/svn/introduction/beyond.html ĸen Well, systemd has not only changed the way the system boots, it also wants all libraries and executables under /usr. Since the icedtea build system uses hardcoded paths, and some of those paths begin with /bin or /sbin, you need a patch. There is already a patch in the book, which changes some of the paths for building within the LFS layout, but the systemd layout needs more changes... Pierre -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-support] Iced Tea again!!!!!
On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 01:01:18PM +1300, m...@pc-networking-services.com wrote: Hello, Well this is ridiculous. I have reached the point after a few days of installing the systemd 7.5 version of LFS, and going through the configuration of quite a number of other packages following BLFS 7.5 stable to the point of having a working graphical interface, so decide now is a good time to install java again. I set everything up as per the instructions, which I did when I first set it up following the previous version of LFS. This time round though I can NOT even get the blasted thing to compile. I have even reverted back to the iced tea 2.4.1 and get EXACTLY the same message. Please note that in between changing the versions I have deleted the files for the CURRENT 7.5 stable version. The only thing that I did not do was to delete /usr/share/java before extracting the earlier binary and supporting files. BOOT_JAR_CMD = /opt/icedtea-2.4.1/bootstrap/jdk1.6.0/bin/jar BOOT_JARSIGNER_CMD = /opt/icedtea-2.4.1/bootstrap/jdk1.6.0/bin/jarsigner JAVAC_CMD = JAVAH_CMD = JAVADOC_CMD = Build Platform Settings: USER = root PLATFORM = linux ARCH = i586 LIBARCH = i386 ARCH_FAMILY = i586 ARCH_DATA_MODEL = 32 ARCHPROP = i386 ALSA_VERSION = 1.0.27.2 OS_VERSION = 3.13.3 [requires at least 2.6] OS_VARIANT_NAME = Linux From Scratch OS_VARIANT_VERSION = 7.5-systemd MB_OF_MEMORY = 1504 GNU Make Settings: MAKE = /usr/bin/make MAKECMDGOALS = sanity MAKEFLAGS = w SHELL = /bin/sh Target Build Versions: JDK_VERSION = 1.7.0_40External File/Binary Locations: USRJDKINSTANCES_PATH = /opt/java BUILD_JDK_IMPORT_PATH = /NOT-SET/re/jdk/1.7.0_40/promoted/latest/binaries ALT_BUILD_JDK_IMPORT_PATH = JDK_IMPORT_PATH = /opt/icedtea-2.4.1/bootstrap/jdk1.6.0 ALT_JDK_IMPORT_PATH = /opt/icedtea-2.4.1/bootstrap/jdk1.6.0 LANGTOOLS_DIST = ALT_LANGTOOLS_DIST = /opt/icedtea-2.4.1/openjdk.build-boot/langtools/dist CORBA_DIST = ALT_CORBA_DIST = /opt/icedtea-2.4.1/openjdk.build-boot/corba/dist JAXP_DIST = ALT_JAXP_DIST = /opt/icedtea-2.4.1/openjdk.build-boot/jaxp/dist JAXWS_DIST = ALT_JAXWS_DIST = /opt/icedtea-2.4.1/openjdk.build-boot/jaxws/dist HOTSPOT_DOCS_IMPORT_PATH = /NO_DOCS_DIR ALT_HOTSPOT_DOCS_IMPORT_PATH = HOTSPOT_IMPORT_PATH = /opt/icedtea-2.4.1/openjdk.build-boot/hotspot/import ALT_HOTSPOT_IMPORT_PATH = /opt/icedtea-2.4.1/openjdk.build-boot/hotspot/import HOTSPOT_CLIENT_PATH = /opt/icedtea-2.4.1/openjdk.build-boot/hotspot/import/jre/lib/i386/client ALT_HOTSPOT_CLIENT_PATH = HOTSPOT_SERVER_PATH = /opt/icedtea-2.4.1/openjdk.build-boot/hotspot/import/jre/lib/i386/server ALT_HOTSPOT_SERVER_PATH = CACERTS_FILE = ./../src/share/lib/security/cacerts ALT_CACERTS_FILE = CUPS_HEADERS_PATH = /usr/include ALT_CUPS_HEADERS_PATH = OpenJDK-specific settings: FREETYPE_HEADERS_PATH = /usr/include ALT_FREETYPE_HEADERS_PATH = FREETYPE_LIB_PATH = /usr/lib ALT_FREETYPE_LIB_PATH = Previous JDK Settings: PREVIOUS_RELEASE_PATH = USING-PREVIOUS_RELEASE_IMAGE ALT_PREVIOUS_RELEASE_PATH = PREVIOUS_JDK_VERSION = 1.6.0 ALT_PREVIOUS_JDK_VERSION = PREVIOUS_JDK_FILE = ALT_PREVIOUS_JDK_FILE = PREVIOUS_JRE_FILE = ALT_PREVIOUS_JRE_FILE = PREVIOUS_RELEASE_IMAGE = /opt/icedtea-2.4.1/bootstrap/jdk1.6.0 ALT_PREVIOUS_RELEASE_IMAGE = MILESTONE = fcs RELEASE = 1.7.0_40-blfs FULL_VERSION = 1.7.0_40-blfs-b31 BUILD_NUMBER = b31 WARNING: This build does not include running javadoc. WARNING: The version of unzip being used is older than the required version of '5.12'. The version of unzip found was ''. WARNING: The version of zip being used is older than the required version of '2.2'. The version of zip found was ''. ERROR: The version of make being used is older than the required version of '3.81'. The version of make found was ''. ERROR: Your BOOTDIR environment variable does not point to a valid JDK for bootstrapping this build. A JDK 7 Update 40 build must be bootstrapped using JDK 1.6.0 fcs (or later). Apparently, your bootstrap JDK is version Please update your ALT_BOOTDIR setting and start your build again. Exiting because of the above error(s). make/sanity-rules.gmk:71: recipe for target 'post-sanity' failed make[1]: *** [post-sanity] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory '/opt/icedtea-2.4.1/openjdk-boot' Makefile:2465: recipe for target 'stamps/icedtea-boot.stamp' failed make: *** [stamps/icedtea-boot.stamp] Error 2 I went to the icedtea wiki page at: http://icedtea.classpath.org/wiki/CommonIssues and it has the exact message about the ALT_BOOTDIR and it suggested recompiling gcc. I have done this as I needed to add the other languages, so I did the recompile of gcc stock standard per the BLFS
