| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Bob P
Advocate
Joined: 20 Oct 2004
Posts: 3355
Location: Jackass! Development Labs
|
 Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2005 3:28 pm Post subject: Re: cant emerge - access violation error |
 |
|
| lpx wrote: | I just finished emerge sync and portage told me to update portage.
|
its okay to update portage after you perform an emerge --sync in section 6.6.3. that will happen to you whenever a new version of portage gets introduced into the portage tree.
i would disagree with the recommendation to wait. if there's a version of portage that's newer than the one in the tarball and you DON'T update right away, then your first emerge -e system will STOP when portage is emerged. you're emerge will be incomplete, and you'll get the message to start over. you may not see this if you're joining commands with &&, and the result is that in performing yoiur build you will have actually performed one emerge -e system too few.
when this happens, you have to repeat the entire emerge -e system that was truncated when portage was emerged, and then resume the reinstall where it left off.
you're better off emerging portage right away.
_________________
.
Stage 1/3 | Jackass! | Rockhopper! | Thanks | Google Sucks |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Bob P
Advocate
Joined: 20 Oct 2004
Posts: 3355
Location: Jackass! Development Labs
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2005 3:42 pm Post subject: Re: cant emerge - access violation error |
|
|
| lpx wrote: | i passed the error taking out the userpriv and usersandbox flags from /etc/make.conf
i then updated portage and everything right until now. |
sanboxing errors are unfortunately all too common. sanbox is there for security reasons, but sometimes its broken. in that case, your only choice is to turn sandboxing off and file a bug report.
_________________
.
Stage 1/3 | Jackass! | Rockhopper! | Thanks | Google Sucks |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
morphal
Apprentice
Joined: 17 Feb 2005
Posts: 173
Location: Houston
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2005 7:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Okay, I posted a big explanation about an issue that had already been discussed. My mistake. =)
Any word on that issue with whether or not glibc should be masked/unmasked, now that the version we use is stable? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bob P
Advocate
Joined: 20 Oct 2004
Posts: 3355
Location: Jackass! Development Labs
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 01, 2005 8:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
hey -- avatars are back. 
i think that the answer to that question largely depends upon whether or not you want to participate in the testing branch. if you don't, then i'd remove the glibc reference from package.keywords; if you do, then leave it in.
ultimately, its a crapshoot and there's not a clear indiciation to go one way or the other, as toolkit patches tend to get applied across both branches when the come along. with regard to those packages, i'm not sure that testing vs. stable makes a big difference. it all depends on the state of the portage tree when you commit to your build. you might as well flip a coin. 
_________________
.
Stage 1/3 | Jackass! | Rockhopper! | Thanks | Google Sucks |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bob P
Advocate
Joined: 20 Oct 2004
Posts: 3355
Location: Jackass! Development Labs
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 02, 2005 11:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
well, that bug got closed as RESOLVED INVALID, which means that the Devs aren't worried that the testing branch package has no stable branch counterpart. if yoiu're going to use the new glibc, edit your package.keywords file accordingly.
_________________
.
Stage 1/3 | Jackass! | Rockhopper! | Thanks | Google Sucks |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mr. Garr
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 27 Jun 2003
Posts: 130
Location: Shangri-La
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 05, 2005 1:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Upon completion of the rebuild of the compiling toolkit, we will recompile the entire system to assure that our entire toolkit has been compiled using GCC 3.4.4 and our hardware-specific settings.
The result will be a 3.4.4 tooklit and an entire system that is built with a 3.4.4 toolkit, that was built with a 3.4.4 toolkit. 
| Code: |
# emerge -e system && emerge -e system |
|
is the code thing okay?
_________________
Illuminatus Primus |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bob P
Advocate
Joined: 20 Oct 2004
Posts: 3355
Location: Jackass! Development Labs
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bob P
Advocate
Joined: 20 Oct 2004
Posts: 3355
Location: Jackass! Development Labs
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bob P
Advocate
Joined: 20 Oct 2004
Posts: 3355
Location: Jackass! Development Labs
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 12, 2005 5:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Has Hell Frozen Over? The Stage 1 Install is Now UNSUPPORTED!
| Gentoo Installation Handbook 2005.1, Nov 12, 2005, Section 5.c wrote: |
Make sure you download a stage3 tarball - installations using a stage1 or stage2 tarball are not supported anymore. |
You know, some people had opined that the original Stage 1/3 Guide for 2004.3 should become the de-facto standard for Gentoo installs -- something that I categorically denied back in January 2005:
| Bob P wrote: | this Guide has always been intended solely as a collection of tips and tricks from advanced users for advanced users. even though its clearly identified as such, the popularity of this installation method has spread like wildfire, such that it is widely being regarded as the de-facto method for installing Gentoo. people are currently referencing this guide and saying that the Stage 1 installation method has been deprecated and this method is its replacement! unfortunately, nothing could be farther from the truth.
this guide should not, by any means, be considered to be a standard or a default Gentoo installation method. its a kludge workaround that has been developed to put a band-aid on a problem that exists in Gentoo 2004.3 that i hope will be absent when 2005.0 is released. hopefully then this method of installation can be abandoned and this installation guide can be erased.
unfortunately, an incredibly large number of inexperienced users have adopted this guide, and placed somewhat unrealistic expectations upon it. as a result, i have become an absolute n00b magnet. i literally get scores of personal messages where new users are petitioning me to provide them with installation help and technical support, as if i have become some sort of cult h3r0 -- a pied-piper of the basement-dwelling linux nerds, so to speak.
please bear in mind that this Guide is a non-official/unauthorized and unsupported installation method. it is not recommended as a standard installation method. as such, users should expect that they may encounter problems that they will need to solve on their own, or with the assistance of the support forums. |
i still maintain that the Stage 1/3 Guides are non-official, kludge workaround methods that should only be used by members of the lunatic fringe until Gentoo gets around to updating the standard Stage 3 x86 toolkit. but if Gentoo isn't going to officially supprt Stage 1 installs any more, what options are left?
i'm guessing that the Ali3nx Stage 1 Developers Method and the Stage 1/3 Guides are going to become alot more popular, solely because Official options are no longer supported.
_________________
.
Stage 1/3 | Jackass! | Rockhopper! | Thanks | Google Sucks |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
warrens
Apprentice
Joined: 04 Jan 2005
Posts: 210
Location: Don't Tread On Me!
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 13, 2005 3:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
I am having a problem durring the emerge -e system && emerge -e system step. Emerge stops with the following error when emergeing gpm.
| Code: | ./configure --prefix=/usr --host=i686-pc-linux-gnu --mandir=/usr/share/man --infodir=/usr/share/info --datadir=/usr/share --sysconfdir=/etc --localstatedir=/var/lib --build=i686-pc-linux-gnu --libdir=/lib --sysconfdir=/etc/gpm
creating cache ./config.cache
checking for gcc... gcc
checking whether the C compiler (gcc -O3 -march=pentium4 -force-addr -fomit-frame-pointer -pipe -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 ) works... no
configure: error: installation or configuration problem: C compiler cannot create executables.
!!! Please attach the config.log to your bug report:
!!! /var/tmp/portage/gpm-1.20.1-r5/work/gpm-1.20.1/config.log
!!! ERROR: sys-libs/gpm-1.20.1-r5 failed.
!!! Function econf, Line 485, Exitcode 0
!!! econf failed
!!! If you need support, post the topmost build error, NOT this status message.
|
Is this a problem associated with Stage 1/3, a bug with the ebuild for gpm, or a bug in gpm itself? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Raftysworld
Apprentice
Joined: 27 Feb 2005
Posts: 236
Location: Snohomish, WA
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 13, 2005 4:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
It is a typo in your CFLAG statement. Take a look at all of them, but ensure you change -force-addr to -fforce-addr
_________________
emerge --info
Portage 2.1.4 (default-linux/x86/dev/2007.1, gcc-4.2.2, glibc-2.7-r1, 2.6.24-gentoo i686) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Raftysworld
Apprentice
Joined: 27 Feb 2005
Posts: 236
Location: Snohomish, WA
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 13, 2005 5:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
@Bob P
It may certainly be for advanced users, but the logical chapter by section by subsection design by which it is written, the stability and performance obtained, and the simple way to build a gcc-3.4 toolkit and a system built off of that... Whether it is designed for advanced users or not, it is becoming a defacto standard within the community, and I agree with your assumption that it will now gain in popularity. Assuming the method that you use to build the toolkit is the best way to accomplish the task, I think that the Gentoo devs adopting a method similar to this as a successor to the Stage1 method is not out of the question. Even if it isn't adopted, it seems that this is now the only legitamate way to perform a "stage1" installation anymore.
_________________
emerge --info
Portage 2.1.4 (default-linux/x86/dev/2007.1, gcc-4.2.2, glibc-2.7-r1, 2.6.24-gentoo i686) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
warrens
Apprentice
Joined: 04 Jan 2005
Posts: 210
Location: Don't Tread On Me!
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 13, 2005 8:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | It is a typo in your CFLAG statement. Take a look at all of them, but ensure you change -force-addr to -fforce-addr |
Doh!! Sometimes I am just braindead!!!! Currently doing the emerge -e system && emerge -e system step, no more problems so far. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bob P
Advocate
Joined: 20 Oct 2004
Posts: 3355
Location: Jackass! Development Labs
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bob P
Advocate
Joined: 20 Oct 2004
Posts: 3355
Location: Jackass! Development Labs
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 13, 2005 2:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Raftysworld wrote: | | ... Whether it is designed for advanced users or not, it is becoming a defacto standard within the community, and I agree with your assumption that it will now gain in popularity. Assuming the method that you use to build the toolkit is the best way to accomplish the task, I think that the Gentoo devs adopting a method similar to this as a successor to the Stage1 method is not out of the question. Even if it isn't adopted, it seems that this is now the only legitamate way to perform a "stage1" installation anymore. |
Well, @ciaranm has gone on the record recommending that if anyone wants to perform a Stage 1 install, then they should perform a stage 3 install followed by two emerge -e worlds. as it turns out, when you do a stage 3 install, the world packages haven't been populated yet, so the system and world packages are the same.
this means that the "new" Stage 1 install is the EXACT same procedure as the Stage 1/3 install -- the only difference is that the Stage 1/3 install emerges a new toolkit before performing the redundant system emerges. so it doesn't look like the developers are recommending a SIMILAR method as a successor to the Stage 1 install -- they're recommending the EXACT SAME METHOD to replace the Stage 1 install.
as it turns out, this is the EXACT METHOD that I use to build the Jackass! canned, Stage 1-equivalent Stage 3 tarballs.
i feel SO far ahead of the curve on this its not even funny. thanks, rac. 
_________________
.
Stage 1/3 | Jackass! | Rockhopper! | Thanks | Google Sucks |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
scharkalvin
Guru
Joined: 31 Jan 2004
Posts: 331
Location: south florida
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 15, 2005 1:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I see you posted that the guide has been updated for 2005.1. I followed the
link but there was no mention of 2005.1.
Can I follow this guide, but start out with a stage 3 tarball
from the gentoo 2005.1 install branch?
Wow now it's your way or the highway, the handbook has dropped
the stage 1 and 2 tarballs!
(I found the support thread!!! got to bookmark this.)
I have a K6-300 system (Asus MB with 256MB of ram).
I'd like to optimize the system around the K6 specific
march parameters. Install time isn't an issue (so long
as the power doesn't fail in the middle!) I'd like to get
an old war horse computer up doing something usefull.
I'll probably install XFCE-4 instead of Gnome or KDE, I'm
using XFCE on an old PIII and it's not a bad desktop. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bob P
Advocate
Joined: 20 Oct 2004
Posts: 3355
Location: Jackass! Development Labs
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 15, 2005 6:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| scharkalvin wrote: | I see you posted that the guide has been updated for 2005.1. I followed the
link but there was no mention of 2005.1.
Can I follow this guide, but start out with a stage 3 tarball
from the gentoo 2005.1 install branch?
|
it depends which version of the Guide you're talking about. each respective version of the Guide very clearly identifies what version it supports and what media is required. maybe you didn't read the entire Guide, or just skipped over some of the details. my recommendation would be to read the entire Guide in detail. every question you've asked is already addressed there.
_________________
.
Stage 1/3 | Jackass! | Rockhopper! | Thanks | Google Sucks |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
prolific
Apprentice
Joined: 19 Apr 2002
Posts: 237
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 17, 2005 7:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
i was following the 2005.1 guide .. i first had 2005.1 installed with the default gcc compiler (3.3.5) and the x86 branch ...
i started following the 2005.1 guide at step 6.5 Configuring the USE Flags, Portage Options, and Compile Options: /etc/make.conf since i had already done the previous steps from my initial install ...
i rebooted my computer and now i can't even login .. it doesn't matter if i try to login as root or my regular user .. i type in "root" into the login prompt and it doesn't even ask for a password, it just goes back to the login prompt |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
warrens
Apprentice
Joined: 04 Jan 2005
Posts: 210
Location: Don't Tread On Me!
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 17, 2005 8:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| prolific wrote: | i was following the 2005.1 guide .. i first had 2005.1 installed with the default gcc compiler (3.3.5) and the x86 branch ...
i started following the 2005.1 guide at step 6.5 Configuring the USE Flags, Portage Options, and Compile Options: /etc/make.conf since i had already done the previous steps from my initial install ...
i rebooted my computer and now i can't even login .. it doesn't matter if i try to login as root or my regular user .. i type in "root" into the login prompt and it doesn't even ask for a password, it just goes back to the login prompt |
Most likely you forgot to set the root password. It has happened to me a couple of time before. 
Just go back into the chroot enviroment and issue passwd root, then exit and reboot. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
prolific
Apprentice
Joined: 19 Apr 2002
Posts: 237
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 17, 2005 8:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| warrens wrote: | | prolific wrote: | i was following the 2005.1 guide .. i first had 2005.1 installed with the default gcc compiler (3.3.5) and the x86 branch ...
i started following the 2005.1 guide at step 6.5 Configuring the USE Flags, Portage Options, and Compile Options: /etc/make.conf since i had already done the previous steps from my initial install ...
i rebooted my computer and now i can't even login .. it doesn't matter if i try to login as root or my regular user .. i type in "root" into the login prompt and it doesn't even ask for a password, it just goes back to the login prompt |
Most likely you forgot to set the root password. It has happened to me a couple of time before.
Just go back into the chroot enviroment and issue passwd root, then exit and reboot. |
no, this isn't the problem ...
because right after i type root and press enter, it doesn't even prompt me for a password, it just spits back to the login: screen .. something more sinister is at work here |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bob P
Advocate
Joined: 20 Oct 2004
Posts: 3355
Location: Jackass! Development Labs
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 18, 2005 3:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
i was reading one of your other posts and i got kinda confused. i get the impression that you're trying to update a previously installed system. is that right?
edit: 3000
_________________
.
Stage 1/3 | Jackass! | Rockhopper! | Thanks | Google Sucks |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
prolific
Apprentice
Joined: 19 Apr 2002
Posts: 237
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 18, 2005 4:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
yeah thats right ..
this method only works on freshly installed systems ? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bob P
Advocate
Joined: 20 Oct 2004
Posts: 3355
Location: Jackass! Development Labs
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 18, 2005 4:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
no, its not that it only works on freshly installed systems -- its that i can't support it on previously built systems.
its written as an install guide because if you start from a clean slate, i know exactly what you've got on your system and exactly how to fix problems that may pop-up. if you start from a previously installed system, there is no way for me to know what you're using as a starting point, and its impossible for me to guess what kind of defect in your system may be causing your problems.
this is the reason that i've never provided support for the Stage 1/3 as a system update. if you're having problems updating a system, you really need to pursue this in the regular support forums, like Portage & Programming.
what arch are you building for? instead of bothering with a Stage 1/3 install, you might be better off using a prebuilt equivalent like Jackass!
_________________
.
Stage 1/3 | Jackass! | Rockhopper! | Thanks | Google Sucks |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
prolific
Apprentice
Joined: 19 Apr 2002
Posts: 237
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 22, 2005 12:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
anyone successfully get vmware installed with gentoo 2005.1 /w gcc 3.4.4 ? this is what happened on my attempt ..
localhost prolific # /opt/vmware/workstation/bin/vmware-config.pl
sh: line 1: 9670 Segmentation fault 'grep' '^[0-9a-fA-F]\{8\} \w printk' /proc/kallsyms 2>/dev/null
Making sure services for VMware Workstation are stopped.
*** at this point nothing was appearing on the console so i pressed CTRL+C and got the output below ... ***
* Caching service dependencies ...
* Service 'cupsd' should be AFTER service 'vmware', but one of
* the services 'vmware' depends on, depends on 'cupsd'! [ ok ]
* ERROR: "vmware" has not yet been started.
You must read and accept the End User License Agreement to continue.
Press enter to display it.
Do you accept? (yes/no) yes
Thank you.
Configuring fallback GTK+ 2.4 libraries.
Trying to find a suitable vmmon module for your running kernel.
None of the pre-built vmmon modules for VMware Workstation is suitable for your
running kernel. Do you want this program to try to build the vmmon module for
your system (you need to have a C compiler installed on your system)? [yes]
Using compiler "/usr/bin/gcc". Use environment variable CC to override.
What is the location of the directory of C header files that match your running
kernel? [/lib/modules/2.6.14-gentoo-r2/build/include]
Extracting the sources of the vmmon module.
Building the vmmon module.
Using 2.6.x kernel build system.
make: Entering directory `/tmp/vmware-config5/vmmon-only'
make -C /lib/modules/2.6.14-gentoo-r2/build/include/.. SUBDIRS=$PWD SRCROOT=$PWD/. modules
make[1]: Entering directory `/usr/src/linux-2.6.14-gentoo-r2'
CC [M] /tmp/vmware-config5/vmmon-only/linux/driver.o
CC [M] /tmp/vmware-config5/vmmon-only/linux/hostif.o
CC [M] /tmp/vmware-config5/vmmon-only/common/cpuid.o
CC [M] /tmp/vmware-config5/vmmon-only/common/hash.o
CC [M] /tmp/vmware-config5/vmmon-only/common/memtrack.o
CC [M] /tmp/vmware-config5/vmmon-only/common/phystrack.o
CC [M] /tmp/vmware-config5/vmmon-only/common/task.o
CC [M] /tmp/vmware-config5/vmmon-only/common/vmx86.o
CC [M] /tmp/vmware-config5/vmmon-only/vmcore/moduleloop.o
LD [M] /tmp/vmware-config5/vmmon-only/vmmon.o
Building modules, stage 2.
MODPOST
CC /tmp/vmware-config5/vmmon-only/vmmon.mod.o
LD [M] /tmp/vmware-config5/vmmon-only/vmmon.ko
make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/linux-2.6.14-gentoo-r2'
cp -f vmmon.ko ./../vmmon.o
make: Leaving directory `/tmp/vmware-config5/vmmon-only'
Unable to make a vmmon module that can be loaded in the running kernel:
There is probably a slight difference in the kernel configuration between the
set of C header files you specified and your running kernel. You may want to
rebuild a kernel based on that directory, or specify another directory.
For more information on how to troubleshoot module-related problems, please
visit our Web site at "http://www.vmware.com/download/modules/modules.html" and
"http://www.vmware.com/support/reference/linux/prebuilt_modules_linux.html".
Execution aborted.
localhost prolific # |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
masinger53
n00b
Joined: 08 Nov 2004
Posts: 9
Location: Bumblefart, FL
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 23, 2005 7:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hello and thanks for the guide. I am somewhat of a Gentoo newb, in that I have only installed it half a dozen times or so; I did a stage 1 install a couple of times because I wanted to learn more about Linux and boy, howdy! I did.
Just finished the 2005.1 Stage 1/3 on my Inspiron 9100 laptop in a dual boot configuration. I'm now working on getting X running and some minimal devlopment toys in place.
Problem is the boot time -- several minutes -- I kid you not. Way slower than the previous Gentoo install (which was 2005.0 IIRC). Granted, the hardware is not bleeding edge - 3Ghz Pentium 4 w/HT, 512 RAM -- but several minutes is just plain wrong. The bottlenecks appear at calculating modules dependencies (takes roughly 2+ minutes) and coldplugging (takes roughly 30 seconds).
After poking around the Gentoo forums a bit, I've run across some older threads regarding modules-update, but can't seem to locate a recent workaround for this issue.
Could someone recommend one? Or should I just use this approach:
http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-131142-highlight-modulesupdate+slow+boot.html
_________________
Thanks,
Mary Anna |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Installing Gentoo
