Re: [gentoo-user] openwatcom ebuild question
On Sunday 15 November 2009 06:07:59 David Relson wrote: The lack of 64-bit buildability for openwatcom is a whole 'nother subject and I'm in communication with the developer about it. Is this the very famous watcom compiler that's been around longer than MS-DOS and eventually ended up being owned by Sybase? -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
Re: [gentoo-user] openwatcom ebuild question
On Sat, 14 Nov 2009 23:12:31 +0100, Daniel Pielmeier wrote: Do you use distcc? Try if the ebuild works with temporary disabling distcc. If distcc is to blame, fixing wont be that easy. You have to examine build.sh and fix it in order to work with distcc. Or disable distcc in the ebuild. Or add FEATURES=-distcc to /etc/portage/env/dev-land/openwatcom-1.7.1 Create whatever of the path is missing. -- Neil Bothwick There is so much sand in Northern Africa that if it were spread out it would completely cover the Sahara Desert. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] openwatcom ebuild question
David Relson schrieb am 15.11.2009 05:07: Daniel, A detail I meant to include in my original posting is that I'm attempting the build on (and for) a 32 bit machine. So distcc _is_ the problem. The lack of 64-bit buildability for openwatcom is a whole 'nother subject and I'm in communication with the developer about it. Regards, David Everything correct. I was just confused as there were two problems distcc on one hand and the 64bit problem in the other hand. -- Daniel Pielmeier signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-user] openwatcom ebuild question
On Sun, 15 Nov 2009 10:29:12 +0200 Alan McKinnon wrote: On Sunday 15 November 2009 06:07:59 David Relson wrote: The lack of 64-bit buildability for openwatcom is a whole 'nother subject and I'm in communication with the developer about it. Is this the very famous watcom compiler that's been around longer than MS-DOS and eventually ended up being owned by Sybase? You are correct -- though lacking the Sybase released it to the open source world detail.
Re: [gentoo-user] openwatcom ebuild question
On Sunday 15 November 2009 15:44:16 David Relson wrote: On Sun, 15 Nov 2009 10:29:12 +0200 Alan McKinnon wrote: On Sunday 15 November 2009 06:07:59 David Relson wrote: The lack of 64-bit buildability for openwatcom is a whole 'nother subject and I'm in communication with the developer about it. Is this the very famous watcom compiler that's been around longer than MS-DOS and eventually ended up being owned by Sybase? You are correct -- though lacking the Sybase released it to the open source world detail. Sybase actually release the source to something? Surely you jest? I used to work for the local Sybase reseller. I would not have thought management would ever have open-sourced anything. Well, well, whaddayaknow. Miracles do happen. watcom was a very nice compiler back in the day. I remember it trashing the pants off anything else in the market (this was in the DOS-3.x era) -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
Re: [gentoo-user] openwatcom ebuild question
On Sun, 15 Nov 2009 17:06:27 +0200 Alan McKinnon wrote: On Sunday 15 November 2009 15:44:16 David Relson wrote: On Sun, 15 Nov 2009 10:29:12 +0200 Alan McKinnon wrote: On Sunday 15 November 2009 06:07:59 David Relson wrote: The lack of 64-bit buildability for openwatcom is a whole 'nother subject and I'm in communication with the developer about it. Is this the very famous watcom compiler that's been around longer than MS-DOS and eventually ended up being owned by Sybase? You are correct -- though lacking the Sybase released it to the open source world detail. Sybase actually release the source to something? Surely you jest? I used to work for the local Sybase reseller. I would not have thought management would ever have open-sourced anything. Well, well, whaddayaknow. Miracles do happen. watcom was a very nice compiler back in the day. I remember it trashing the pants off anything else in the market (this was in the DOS-3.x era) For more on Watcom C's history, including the Sybase release as open source, see http://www.openwatcom.org/index.php/History I used Watcom C quite a bit in the mid '90s to develop a bookkeepping program for Michigan Bingo games, and even made some spending money off of the project :- At that time, my host operating system was 32-bit OS/2 and the target was 16-bit DOS. Watcom worked like a champion for me!
Re: [gentoo-user] openwatcom ebuild question
David Relson a écrit :
As background, http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=233097 has an
experimental, unsupported ebuild for openwatcom-1.7.1 and it doesn't
quite work :-
The ebuild's src_compile function is:
src_compile() {
./build.sh || die build.sh failed
}
When I run emerge =dev-lang/openwatcom-1.7.1, the build fails with
/usr/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.1.2/../../../../i686-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ld:
i386:x86-64 architecture of input file `bootstrp/clibext.o' is
incompatible with i386 output distcc[16016] ERROR: compile (null)
on localhost failed
You use distcc. But seems to be not well configured. Just disable distcc to
build the package (FEATURES=-distcc in /etc/make.conf).
HTH.
The full output of the emerge command is in the attached file.
Alternatively, I can manually unpack and build with commands:
ebuild =dev-lang/openwatcom-1.7.1.ebuild unpack
cd /var/tmp/dev-lang/openwatcom-1.7.1/work
./build.sh
With the steps performed manually, the compilation works properly.
Anybody familiar with the i386:x86-64 ... incompatible ... i386
message and know what it means?
Any suggestions on ebuild changes to correct this behavior?
Thanks !
David
--
Xavier Parizet
YaGB : http://gentooist.com
GPG :C7DC B10E FC21 63BE
B453 D239 F6E6 DF65 1569 91BF
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-user] openwatcom ebuild question
David Relson schrieb am 14.11.2009 21:33:
As background, http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=233097 has an
experimental, unsupported ebuild for openwatcom-1.7.1 and it doesn't
quite work :-
The ebuild's src_compile function is:
src_compile() {
./build.sh || die build.sh failed
}
When I run emerge =dev-lang/openwatcom-1.7.1, the build fails with
/usr/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.1.2/../../../../i686-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ld:
i386:x86-64 architecture of input file `bootstrp/clibext.o' is
incompatible with i386 output distcc[16016] ERROR: compile (null)
on localhost failed
The full output of the emerge command is in the attached file.
Alternatively, I can manually unpack and build with commands:
ebuild =dev-lang/openwatcom-1.7.1.ebuild unpack
cd /var/tmp/dev-lang/openwatcom-1.7.1/work
./build.sh
With the steps performed manually, the compilation works properly.
Anybody familiar with the i386:x86-64 ... incompatible ... i386
message and know what it means?
Any suggestions on ebuild changes to correct this behavior?
Thanks !
David
Do you use distcc? Try if the ebuild works with temporary disabling
distcc. If distcc is to blame, fixing wont be that easy. You have to
examine build.sh and fix it in order to work with distcc.
--
Daniel Pielmeier
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-user] openwatcom ebuild question
David Relson schrieb am 14.11.2009 21:33:
As background, http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=233097 has an
experimental, unsupported ebuild for openwatcom-1.7.1 and it doesn't
quite work :-
The ebuild's src_compile function is:
src_compile() {
./build.sh || die build.sh failed
}
When I run emerge =dev-lang/openwatcom-1.7.1, the build fails with
/usr/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.1.2/../../../../i686-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ld:
i386:x86-64 architecture of input file `bootstrp/clibext.o' is
incompatible with i386 output distcc[16016] ERROR: compile (null)
on localhost failed
The full output of the emerge command is in the attached file.
Alternatively, I can manually unpack and build with commands:
ebuild =dev-lang/openwatcom-1.7.1.ebuild unpack
cd /var/tmp/dev-lang/openwatcom-1.7.1/work
./build.sh
With the steps performed manually, the compilation works properly.
Anybody familiar with the i386:x86-64 ... incompatible ... i386
message and know what it means?
Any suggestions on ebuild changes to correct this behavior?
Thanks !
David
Okay, this is not a distcc problem.
From looking at the bug. Do you really think by just tricking the
architecture check to accept x86_64 will make it magically compile. You
can't be serious! This software does not build on x86_64 at the moment.
If you don't have the appropriate programming skills to fix this
yourself you have to wait for the openwatcom developers to make it
x86_64 ready.
--
Daniel Pielmeier
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-user] openwatcom ebuild question
On Sat, 14 Nov 2009 22:21:50 +0100
Xavier Parizet wrote:
David Relson a écrit :
As background, http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=233097 has an
experimental, unsupported ebuild for openwatcom-1.7.1 and it doesn't
quite work :-
The ebuild's src_compile function is:
src_compile() {
./build.sh || die build.sh failed
}
When I run emerge =dev-lang/openwatcom-1.7.1, the build fails with
/usr/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.1.2/../../../../i686-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ld:
i386:x86-64 architecture of input file `bootstrp/clibext.o' is
incompatible with i386 output distcc[16016] ERROR: compile
(null) on localhost failed
You use distcc. But seems to be not well configured. Just disable
distcc to build the package (FEATURES=-distcc in /etc/make.conf).
HTH.
Xavier,
It helps a lot! I had installed distcc, but never quite got it
working. Getting it working is on my TODO list, but I hadn't thought
of it when the problem occurred.
Thanks!
David
Re: [gentoo-user] openwatcom ebuild question
On Sat, 14 Nov 2009 23:34:46 +0100
Daniel Pielmeier wrote:
David Relson schrieb am 14.11.2009 21:33:
As background, http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=233097 has an
experimental, unsupported ebuild for openwatcom-1.7.1 and it doesn't
quite work :-
The ebuild's src_compile function is:
src_compile() {
./build.sh || die build.sh failed
}
When I run emerge =dev-lang/openwatcom-1.7.1, the build fails with
/usr/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.1.2/../../../../i686-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ld:
i386:x86-64 architecture of input file `bootstrp/clibext.o' is
incompatible with i386 output distcc[16016] ERROR: compile
(null) on localhost failed
The full output of the emerge command is in the attached file.
Alternatively, I can manually unpack and build with commands:
ebuild =dev-lang/openwatcom-1.7.1.ebuild unpack
cd /var/tmp/dev-lang/openwatcom-1.7.1/work
./build.sh
With the steps performed manually, the compilation works properly.
Anybody familiar with the i386:x86-64 ... incompatible ... i386
message and know what it means?
Any suggestions on ebuild changes to correct this behavior?
Thanks !
David
Okay, this is not a distcc problem.
From looking at the bug. Do you really think by just tricking the
architecture check to accept x86_64 will make it magically compile.
You can't be serious! This software does not build on x86_64 at the
moment. If you don't have the appropriate programming skills to fix
this yourself you have to wait for the openwatcom developers to make
it x86_64 ready.
--
Daniel Pielmeier
Daniel,
A detail I meant to include in my original posting is that I'm
attempting the build on (and for) a 32 bit machine. So distcc _is_
the problem.
The lack of 64-bit buildability for openwatcom is a whole 'nother
subject and I'm in communication with the developer about it.
Regards,
David
