View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
billydv l33t
Joined: 22 Dec 2006 Posts: 911 Location: Mount Vernon, NY
|
Posted: Sat Apr 09, 2011 8:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Okay, I found the bug that reports grub as broken. _________________ Billy DeVincentis |
|
Back to top |
|
|
mv Watchman
Joined: 20 Apr 2005 Posts: 6747
|
Posted: Sat Apr 09, 2011 10:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
duncanphilipnorman wrote: | I think you need glibc-2.13-r2... |
Yes, I can confirm this now; at least glibc-2.11.3 is not sufficient. After upgrading glibc, there was not problem compiling gcc-4.6, even with unsafer flags...
I think the most severe problems with glibc-2.13-r2 are solved now: skype was upgraded, adobe-flash was patched. So far, I had no problems concerning glibc-2.13-r2. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
mv Watchman
Joined: 20 Apr 2005 Posts: 6747
|
Posted: Sat Apr 09, 2011 11:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
billydv wrote: | Okay, I found the bug that reports grub as broken. |
But it is a bad sign that broken code is produced. However, grub mixes assembler with C, so if some interface has changed, this need not be a compiler bug.
However, if kde does not start, I will also better not try to use gcc-4.6 as system compiler yet, although I must say that for development, I prefer the new warnings and the clearer warning messages. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
bingyuan n00b
Joined: 20 Feb 2011 Posts: 13
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
ToeiRei Veteran
Joined: 03 Jan 2005 Posts: 1191 Location: Austria
|
Posted: Sun Apr 10, 2011 12:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I just copied the stage* files from the system rescue CD. That fixed the grub boot problem for me. _________________ Please stand by - The mailer daemon is busy burning your messages in hell... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
duncanphilipnorman n00b
Joined: 05 Apr 2011 Posts: 13
|
Posted: Mon Apr 11, 2011 12:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
mv wrote: | duncanphilipnorman wrote: | I think you need glibc-2.13-r2... |
Yes, I can confirm this now; at least glibc-2.11.3 is not sufficient. After upgrading glibc, there was not problem compiling gcc-4.6, even with unsafer flags...
I think the most severe problems with glibc-2.13-r2 are solved now: skype was upgraded, adobe-flash was patched. So far, I had no problems concerning glibc-2.13-r2. |
Do you know if packages are patched in amd64 (vs. only in ~amd64)?
Edit: grammar. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
mv Watchman
Joined: 20 Apr 2005 Posts: 6747
|
Posted: Mon Apr 11, 2011 4:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
duncanphilipnorman wrote: | Do you know if packages are patched in amd64 (vs. only in ~amd64)? |
Usually this was never the case for new gcc/gibc: If some package breaks with the new version, you have to enter that package in yuor /etc/portage/package.accept_keywords. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
duncanphilipnorman n00b
Joined: 05 Apr 2011 Posts: 13
|
Posted: Mon Apr 11, 2011 4:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
mv wrote: |
Usually this was never the case for new gcc/gibc: If some package breaks with the new version, you have to enter that package in yuor /etc/portage/package.accept_keywords. |
Okay, thanks... I guess I just won't be installing gcc-4.6.0 for now. That'll make my systems unsuitably unstable, just for the sake of adding a new secondary compiler for development. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Etal Veteran
Joined: 15 Jul 2005 Posts: 1931
|
Posted: Mon Apr 11, 2011 6:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You can install gcc-4.6 for development without a problem, just don't set it as the default compiler!
(Also make sure you don't accidentally remove the old one with depclean) _________________ “And even in authoritarian countries, information networks are helping people discover new facts and making governments more accountable.”– Hillary Clinton, Jan. 21, 2010 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
duncanphilipnorman n00b
Joined: 05 Apr 2011 Posts: 13
|
Posted: Mon Apr 11, 2011 6:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Etal wrote: | You can install gcc-4.6 for development without a problem, just don't set it as the default compiler!
(Also make sure you don't accidentally remove the old one with depclean) |
No, I can't: it won't build without glibc-2.13-r2, which breaks a whack of stuff in stable. See the discussion above. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Etal Veteran
Joined: 15 Jul 2005 Posts: 1931
|
Posted: Mon Apr 11, 2011 6:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Oh, sorry. I knew that glibc-2.13 caused problems when built with gcc-4.6, but I missed that you can't build gcc-4.6 without glibc-2.13. That's really weird considering that gcc is supposed to be extremely portable... _________________ “And even in authoritarian countries, information networks are helping people discover new facts and making governments more accountable.”– Hillary Clinton, Jan. 21, 2010 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
duncanphilipnorman n00b
Joined: 05 Apr 2011 Posts: 13
|
Posted: Mon Apr 11, 2011 6:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Etal wrote: | Oh, sorry. I knew that glibc-2.13 caused problems when built with gcc-4.6, but I missed that you can't build gcc-4.6 without glibc-2.13. That's really weird considering that gcc is supposed to be extremely portable... 8O |
Indeed... it's quite frustrating! I wish I had time to look into whether it's a glibc bug that gcc-4.6 exposes, or a gcc bug. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ecko Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 04 Jul 2010 Posts: 102
|
Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2011 5:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
duncanphilipnorman wrote: |
No, I can't: it won't build without glibc-2.13-r2, which breaks a whack of stuff in stable. See the discussion above. |
What discussion are you referring to? Is it this comment:
This bug report says that compiling world with both gcc 4.6.0 and glibc 2.13-r2 will break things, then compiling them again with gcc 4.5 solves the problems. So this is fine. Use gcc-config to keep your safe gcc 4.4.5 or 4.5.2 by default, and call gcc-4.6.0 or gccgo on demand for your personal projects. I did not rebuild world (but I do a daily emerge --update --deep --with-bdeps=y world) with gcc 4.5.2/glibc 2.13-r2 and so far nothing to mention. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
duncanphilipnorman n00b
Joined: 05 Apr 2011 Posts: 13
|
Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2011 6:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ecko wrote: | duncanphilipnorman wrote: |
No, I can't: it won't build without glibc-2.13-r2, which breaks a whack of stuff in stable. See the discussion above. |
What discussion are you referring to? Is it this comment:
This bug report says that compiling world with both gcc 4.6.0 and glibc 2.13-r2 will break things, then compiling them again with gcc 4.5 solves the problems. So this is fine. Use gcc-config to keep your safe gcc 4.4.5 or 4.5.2 by default, and call gcc-4.6.0 or gccgo on demand for your personal projects. I did not rebuild world (but I do a daily emerge --update --deep --with-bdeps=y world) with gcc 4.5.2/glibc 2.13-r2 and so far nothing to mention. |
Nope... I'm referring to the discussion about not being able to bootstrap with glibc-2.11.3. I use these systems for work, so I'm not going to risk updating glibc to unstable (similarly, I use stable gcc for the system compiler in gcc-config).
I'm not willing to use unstable glibc => I cannot bootstrap gcc-4.6.0 => I cannot use gcc-4.6.0 for development. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ecko Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 04 Jul 2010 Posts: 102
|
Posted: Wed Apr 13, 2011 7:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
duncanphilipnorman wrote: | glibc-2.13-r2, which breaks a whack of stuff in stable. |
I can't find reports in bugzilla that glibc-2.13-r2 would break so many things in stable.
Of course if you do not want to tale risks, you just do not… but if there are problems with glibc 2.13-r2, I would be very interested to read about it to prepare myself, since I upgraded glibc a week ago on my work machine (to get gcc-4.6 and gccgo for development), build world packages with gcc-4.5.2 and up to now, everything works just fine. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
duncanphilipnorman n00b
Joined: 05 Apr 2011 Posts: 13
|
Posted: Wed Apr 13, 2011 2:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ecko wrote: |
Of course if you do not want to tale risks, you just do not… but if there are problems with glibc 2.13-r2, I would be very interested to read about it to prepare myself, since I upgraded glibc a week ago on my work machine (to get gcc-4.6 and gccgo for development), build world packages with gcc-4.5.2 and up to now, everything works just fine. |
Your list about sums up what I came across; I'm just paranoid about taking risks with glibc, I suppose. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Etal Veteran
Joined: 15 Jul 2005 Posts: 1931
|
Posted: Thu Apr 14, 2011 1:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
As an FYI, I was able to compile gcc-4.6 against glibc-2.12 (my system is ~amd64 but I decided to not update to 2.13):
Code: | # emerge -qvp gcc glibc
[ebuild R ] sys-devel/gcc-4.6.0 USE="fortran graphite gtk mudflap (multilib) nptl openmp (-altivec) -bootstrap -build -doc (-fixed-point) -gcj -go (-hardened) (-libffi) -multislot (-n32) (-n64) -nls -nocxx -nopie -nossp -objc -objc++ -objc-gc -test -vanilla"
[ebuild R ] sys-libs/glibc-2.12.2 USE="(multilib) -debug -gd -glibc-omitfp (-hardened) -nls -profile (-selinux) -vanilla" |
_________________ “And even in authoritarian countries, information networks are helping people discover new facts and making governments more accountable.”– Hillary Clinton, Jan. 21, 2010 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
spielc Guru
Joined: 20 Apr 2004 Posts: 452
|
Posted: Thu Apr 14, 2011 5:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
Etal wrote: | As an FYI, I was able to compile gcc-4.6 against glibc-2.12 (my system is ~amd64 but I decided to not update to 2.13):
Code: | # emerge -qvp gcc glibc
[ebuild R ] sys-devel/gcc-4.6.0 USE="fortran graphite gtk mudflap (multilib) nptl openmp (-altivec) -bootstrap -build -doc (-fixed-point) -gcj -go (-hardened) (-libffi) -multislot (-n32) (-n64) -nls -nocxx -nopie -nossp -objc -objc++ -objc-gc -test -vanilla"
[ebuild R ] sys-libs/glibc-2.12.2 USE="(multilib) -debug -gd -glibc-omitfp (-hardened) -nls -profile (-selinux) -vanilla" |
|
... and this prevents the strange behaviour of gcc-4.6 in combination with glibc in gtk-applications? E.g. https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=362391? _________________ Raise your beers up high... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Fred Krogh Veteran
Joined: 07 Feb 2005 Posts: 1036 Location: Tujunga, CA
|
Posted: Sat Apr 16, 2011 6:00 pm Post subject: gfortran-4.6.0 problem |
|
|
I thought I'd give the 4.6 codes a try. (But not on the gentoo package codes!) Compiling some Fortran codes one problem missed in the previous gfortran was caught so that is good. But an attempt at execution gave Quote: | ./main.ex: /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/4.5.2/libgfortran.so.3: version `GFORTRAN_1.4' not found (required by ./main.ex) | Can anyone explain what should be done to fix this -- without breaking other things. Thanks,
Fred |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ecko Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 04 Jul 2010 Posts: 102
|
Posted: Sun Apr 17, 2011 3:57 pm Post subject: Re: gfortran-4.6.0 problem |
|
|
Fred Krogh wrote: | Quote: | ./main.ex: /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/4.5.2/libgfortran.so.3: version `GFORTRAN_1.4' not found (required by ./main.ex) | Can anyone explain what should be done to fix this -- without breaking other things. Thanks,
Fred |
You can see if the hints given on the gcc list work for you: http://www.mailinglistarchive.com/html/fortran@gcc.gnu.org/2011-02/msg00298.html |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Fred Krogh Veteran
Joined: 07 Feb 2005 Posts: 1036 Location: Tujunga, CA
|
Posted: Sun Apr 17, 2011 6:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks for this link. I can get this to work if I compile with gfortran-4.6.0, and before I run it, I have Quote: | export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/usr/lib64/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/4.6.0/ | in the same terminal window. Note that the path is slightly different on Gentoo, than it was in the link given.
One compiler option suggested there was "-rpath=...". My compiler does not support this option, and I can't find any other sign that this option exists. I've tried to get everything working on the compile line (for use in a make file), but using Quote: | -L/usr/lib64/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/4.6.0/ -lgfortran.so | fails with Quote: | /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/4.6.0/../../../../x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ld: cannot find -lgfortran.so | even though /usr/lib64/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/4.6.0/libgfortran.so does exist it doesn't want to look there. It seems that I could use something like that -rpath option.
If anyone can suggest something that will get this working without requiring the export in the terminal running the code, I'd love to see it. Thanks,
Fred |
|
Back to top |
|
|
mv Watchman
Joined: 20 Apr 2005 Posts: 6747
|
Posted: Sun Apr 17, 2011 9:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Fred Krogh wrote: | Thanks for this link. I can get this to work if I compile with gfortran-4.6.0, and before I run it, I have Quote: | export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/usr/lib64/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/4.6.0/ | in the same terminal window. |
This is, because this path is not in your default library search path. You can add it to your default search path (man ld.so), but then programs requiring gcc-4.5.* libraries might get confused. gcc-config will modify the default search path.
Code: | One compiler option suggested there was "-rpath=...". |
It is not a compiler option but a linker option (man ld). However, using it has some drawbacks. Usually, it is better to let the system (i.e. gcc-config) decide which libraries to use. For instance, you might get troubles with rpath when gcc-4.6.1 comes out with (perhaps) some bug fixed in your fortran library. Then your program will still use the buggy library. On other systems, you binary might cause even more confusion. Roughly speaking, using -rpath means to override the global system defaults for your binary.
Quote: | If anyone can suggest something that will get this working without requiring the export |
This export is the right way to do it: As long as you use gcc-4.6 only for testing/developing, it should not hurt to set the export in your local shell. If it is not only for developing you should switch to gcc-4.6 system wide with gcc-config. (Of course, I suggest that you use gcc-4.6 currently only for testing). |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Fred Krogh Veteran
Joined: 07 Feb 2005 Posts: 1036 Location: Tujunga, CA
|
Posted: Sun Apr 17, 2011 10:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks for the info. I'm only using gfortran-4.6 for code development. That code is not likely to be done prior to this compiler being used for the rest of gentoo. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
billydv l33t
Joined: 22 Dec 2006 Posts: 911 Location: Mount Vernon, NY
|
Posted: Mon Apr 18, 2011 3:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
I know that grub legacy is currently broken with this gcc. Is grub2 also affected?
Does KDE 4.6.2 behave normally with this gcc? _________________ Billy DeVincentis |
|
Back to top |
|
|
spielc Guru
Joined: 20 Apr 2004 Posts: 452
|
Posted: Mon Apr 18, 2011 3:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hi i have some news for all those who wants to give gcc-4.6.0 a try as system compiler.
I have completely whiped my old gentoo installation and rebuild everything from scratch. By now (after a lot of headaches) i have a working kde-installation again, all compiled and working nicely with gcc-4.6.0, glibc-2.12.2 and binutils-2.21. The only thing i haven't been able to compile was dev-libs/nss-3.12.9. But everything else compiled nicely, without having to manually patch things (as far as i can remember this was the first time i tested a gcc-version that early and i didn't have to patch 100 things before i had everything back in place...)
My main headache was that when i booted from the livecd and directly tried to upgrade vom stable gcc-4.4.5 from stage3 to gcc-4.6.0. Building the toolchain itself was no problem but compiling other things afterwards led to, let me say it this way, interesting results. So i had to install gcc-4.5.2 first, build a toolchain with gcc-4.5.2 and upgrade to 4.6.0 afterwards. But as i said before i have a working kde installation by now and everything is working nicely so i think it's fair to say that gcc-4.6.0 can be used as system compiler without any problems. When it comes to gtk-applications i have to say that i didn't see any problems with gcc-4.6.0 and glibc-2.12.2. I installed opera and it worked like a charm.
BUT i would only suggest to install gcc-4.6.0 now if you really know what you are doing else you might wreck your installation with just a few commands EASILY. _________________ Raise your beers up high... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|