On 2015-08-24 17:35, Jacco Ligthart wrote:
On 08/24/2015 05:19 PM, Gordan Bobic wrote:
I've been trying to get the updated FF (38.2) to build on RSEL6 for
the
last
couple of weekends, and while it seems to have built fine on RSEL7,
the
build
on RSEL6 is extensively problematic. Under EL6 it seems to have to
bring
along both it's own python (the build process seems to require 2.7)
and gcc
(seems to require at least 4.7, but brings along 4.8 that is broken on
ARM).
(There is something that wants me to facepalm at the fact that Mozilla
developers consider a 1 year support cycle from release to be
"extended",
as in ESR (Extended Support Release). No, there is no digit missing in
the
"1 year" part.)
I fixes the ARM build of GCC, fixed the configure options (jemalloc
seems to
still not work on RSEL6) but eventually got stuck at the point where
libmozglue.a part of the build fails, complaining about some of the
components of previous build stages missing (arm.o?).
Jacco, have you had any success in getting the EL6 version to build?
Anyone
else?
Nope, the last version I tried was 31.4 (standard EL6). my notes say
that the error was:
Architecture-arm.cpp:101: error: 'HWCAP_VFPv4' was not declared in this
scope
I remember that, there were assumptions made about ARM and FPU.
I've had a patch for that in ages, it should be on the ftp server.
FYI, I'm currently busy rebasing EL6 to upstream version 6.7
I'm getting close to the point (I hope) where I can start the bulk
build. I do however see that there are again more patches needed to get
it al to work.
Yes, I got a few dependencies updated to build firefox, but FF
is being really problematic. >:(
Notable exception: the kernel. It now creates without any patches a
kernel-headers package :)
Wait - what? Are you saying the latest EL6 upstream kernel builds
on ARM? What config/SoC?
This is a bit of a problem since the last version that I managed to
get to build on RSEL6 has some serious security issues.
You mean the kernel? The last EL6 I managed to get to build from
the upstream src.rpm with a custom config and a fair few patches
was 2.6.32-200.x series.
I'm thinking we should probably try to get a LTS mainline kernel
rpm where possible (3.18.x branch) when time permits. I'm not sure
what devices are supported by that, however, and the uboot/firmware
required for this needs to support device trees which may be
problematic on some hardware.
Gordan
_______________________________________________
users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.redsleeve.org/mailman/listinfo/users
