Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
GLIBC 2.4 now officially in portage
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next  
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Portage & Programming
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
nxsty
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 23 Jun 2004
Posts: 1556
Location: .se

PostPosted: Mon Mar 13, 2006 8:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

ssmaxss wrote:
In overlay I have flag gcc4ssp to enable ssp support with gcc 4. In portage it is enabled by default? There is no such flag in portage. Adding NPTL_KERNEL_VERSION="2.6.11" to make.conf helped to fix problem about kernel headers. What about SSP?


The gcc4ssp USE-flag was added by me because I didn't know any good way to detect if the compiler was ssp/fortify capable. I don't know about ssp but fortify doesn't seems to be enabled in portage.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ChL@Gentoo
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 08 Jun 2004
Posts: 94
Location: Heidelberg (Germany)

PostPosted: Mon Mar 13, 2006 9:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

For me the new glibc breaks zsnes. (see Bug 125861)
glibc should be masked till it is tested enough. (there are still other problems)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bob P
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 20 Oct 2004
Posts: 3355
Location: Jackass! Development Labs

PostPosted: Mon Mar 13, 2006 9:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

these stable branch ebuilds proved to be troublemakers when performing today's emerge -e systems:

Busybox-1.00-r4 fails to compile with GCC 4.1 and Glibc 2.4
coreutils-5.2.1-f7 fails to compile with GCC 4.1 with Glibc 2.4

fwiw, the problem seems to be unique to glibc 2.4 on gcc 4.1 -- i had no problems with glibc 2.3.6 on gcc 4.1.

edit: fixed bad hyperlink for the busybox bug.
_________________
.
Stage 1/3 | Jackass! | Rockhopper! | Thanks | Google Sucks


Last edited by Bob P on Mon Mar 13, 2006 10:48 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
nxsty
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 23 Jun 2004
Posts: 1556
Location: .se

PostPosted: Mon Mar 13, 2006 10:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bob P wrote:
these stable branch ebuilds proved to be troublemakers when performing today's emerge -e systems:

Busybox-1.00-r4 fails to compile with GCC 4.1 and Glibc 2.4
coreutils-5.2.1-f7 fails to compile with GCC 4.1 with Glibc 2.4

fwiw, the problem seems to be unique to glibc 2.4 on gcc 4.1 -- i had no problems with glibc 2.3.6 on gcc 4.1.


The problems is when mixing unstable packages with stable. Busybox and coreutils from ~x86 works with glibc 2.4.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bob P
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 20 Oct 2004
Posts: 3355
Location: Jackass! Development Labs

PostPosted: Mon Mar 13, 2006 10:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

indeed. i had bumped coreutils to ~x86 without any problems. i also tried all of the ~x86 versions of busybox and found that they all failed to compile.

i tried another emerge -e system to try to refine the toolkit a bit. the result? patch would not compile!

https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=126036

have you been having success with nptlonly?
_________________
.
Stage 1/3 | Jackass! | Rockhopper! | Thanks | Google Sucks
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
madey
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 07 Dec 2005
Posts: 107
Location: Kraków, Poland

PostPosted: Mon Mar 13, 2006 11:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I just added nptonly to USE in make.conf compiled glibc-2.4 and Xorg stoped working. So I've reemerged xorg and now everythinks works just fine. Many people on polish native forum wrote the same. We had vital discussion since glibc-2.4 appeared :).
I use gcc-3.4.5 on amd64 but many tried the same with x86 and it works to.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ancipital
Bodhisattva
Bodhisattva


Joined: 21 Jul 2002
Posts: 259
Location: Grnn

PostPosted: Tue Mar 14, 2006 11:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

So, just I understand it as well.... the best thing to do is to emerge this glibc, and after that to do an emerge -e world? It would be the first time in years that I would do that; because usually I just emerge glibc and continue without problems.

What's best practice on this one, guys?
_________________
Diplomacy is the art of letting the other party have things your way.
-- Daniele Vare
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Grooby
n00b
n00b


Joined: 08 Jun 2005
Posts: 47

PostPosted: Tue Mar 14, 2006 3:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I actually might do a emerge -e world soon. doing bleeding edge here and emerging the new dbus bork with some qt related error. re-emerging QT right now and see if that's fixed. If so, I might just emerge -e world tonight.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
chtephan
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 03 Feb 2004
Posts: 266
Location: Offenburg, Germany

PostPosted: Tue Mar 14, 2006 4:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes, switching from non-nptl (having both linuxthreads and nptl makes the system use the linuxthreads headers for building libraries and applications) to NPTL can cause troubles (not only from 2.3.6 to 2.4 but also from 2.3.6 normal to 2.3.6 nptlonly). After changing to nptlonly a full rebuild is strongly suggested.

As for the dbus error: It looks like a file is missing in the package.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Grooby
n00b
n00b


Joined: 08 Jun 2005
Posts: 47

PostPosted: Tue Mar 14, 2006 4:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

you are right....i wasn't reading the errors properly...but this is OT...end of this thread branch.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
IntergalacticWalrus
Guru
Guru


Joined: 07 Jan 2003
Posts: 513
Location: Montreal QC (Canada)

PostPosted: Tue Mar 14, 2006 10:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Just updated glibc to 2.4 and it breaks many things. And no I have better things to do than waste my time on a stupid emerge -e world, and then again some apps (ie. zsnes) fail to work even after a rebuild!!! I'd like to know what the hell were the devs thinking when they moved it straight to ~x86. This kind of behavior makes me wonder why I'm still using Gentoo.

Reverting to <2.4 now...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Gergan Penkov
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 17 Jul 2004
Posts: 1464
Location: das kleinste Kuhdorf Deutschlands :)

PostPosted: Tue Mar 14, 2006 10:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

IntergalacticWalrus wrote:

Reverting to <2.4 now...

Happy new install, if you haven't quickpg'd :)
_________________
"I knew when an angel whispered into my ear,
You gotta get him away, yeah
Hey little bitch!
Be glad you finally walked away or you may have not lived another day."
Godsmack
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ribx
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 20 Nov 2003
Posts: 209
Location: germany

PostPosted: Tue Mar 14, 2006 11:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

you are compain about unstable isn't stable enough for you? thats wired.

i had to reemerge xorg-x11 btw.see: Xorg, __guard symbol lost on upgrade to glibc-2.4.0
_________________
The adopt an unanswered post initiative
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
IntergalacticWalrus
Guru
Guru


Joined: 07 Jan 2003
Posts: 513
Location: Montreal QC (Canada)

PostPosted: Tue Mar 14, 2006 11:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Gergan Penkov wrote:
IntergalacticWalrus wrote:

Reverting to <2.4 now...

Happy new install, if you haven't quickpg'd :)

I should be fine as long as I recompile everything after glibc-2.4 (thankfully there was nothing critical, ie. things like gcc) And yes I did quickpkg'd glibc-2.4, just in case.

ribx wrote:
you are compain about unstable isn't stable enough for you? thats wired.

Granted I'm running unstable so I shouldn't be surprised to hit some bumps, but there's a difference between 'unstable' and 'breaking the system'. Basic Gentoo structural rules state that stuff that can break the system must be hard masked.

And no, it's not just Xorg that breaks. diff also broke, and I have no time to check if other things break as well. And as previously mentionned, some things don't work at all (ie. zsnes)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Gergan Penkov
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 17 Jul 2004
Posts: 1464
Location: das kleinste Kuhdorf Deutschlands :)

PostPosted: Tue Mar 14, 2006 11:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I hope that you have at least quickpkg-d 2.4
Quote:
And yes I did quickpkg'd glibc-2.4, just in case.

ok haven't seen this one :)

The problem is not what you have built against 2.4 - the problem is that 2.3.6 would be built against 2.4
_________________
"I knew when an angel whispered into my ear,
You gotta get him away, yeah
Hey little bitch!
Be glad you finally walked away or you may have not lived another day."
Godsmack
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TripleM666
n00b
n00b


Joined: 09 Feb 2006
Posts: 11

PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2006 12:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

is it cause of x86, that glibc 2.4 in combination with gcc 4.1.0 bugs the system? i have done a complete rebuild of the system (in fact even 2 times emerge -e system to satisfy my own paranoia) with gcc4.1 and glibc2.4 on x86_64. no problem, not even the slightest. thousands new warning appear though, most of them, i think, cause of lazy code. even the kernelcompilation shows warnings, but the kernel itself runs quite nice.

not much in world though to break, some compilers, some medialibs.

one thing, that maybe makes the difference. the system, since building it, was compiled with nptl nptlonly. no linuxthreads ever.


so long,
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
eddymulyono
n00b
n00b


Joined: 02 Jan 2004
Posts: 45
Location: Hayward, CA

PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2006 12:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Trying to keep a list of related breakages and workarounds.

Workarounds


Problems


Last edited by eddymulyono on Wed Mar 15, 2006 12:34 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
niskel
Guru
Guru


Joined: 17 Nov 2004
Posts: 457
Location: Fredericton, NB, Canada

PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2006 12:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

TripleM666 wrote:
...
even the kernelcompilation shows warnings, but the kernel itself runs quite nice.
...

The kernel doesn't (can't) use glibc so any new warnings you are getting when compiling the kernel is from your compiler, not glibc.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
nesl247
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 15 Jun 2004
Posts: 1614
Location: Florida

PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2006 12:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

For anyone who has not already re-compiled their system, and who just emerged glibc, this is my method, and generally the suggested one to gurantee all packages are built with the updated symbol..

Code:
# emerge glibc binutils gcc libstdc++-v3 libtool portage
# emerge -e world


For anyone who gets a failed package, please try the ~x86 version of it. I have run 2 entire systems with glibc 2.4 with no problems for several months.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
crowbert
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 28 Apr 2003
Posts: 112

PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2006 3:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I also had the xorg problem, which was easily solved by re-emerging it. And, like others, I also enabled nptl for the first time (since it's required for the new glibc).

The only surprise was that revdep-rebuild didn't find the xorg problem. I guess that only detects if a library is missing (it's not), and it doesn't actually do all the dynamic linking for each program.

No other issues detected. If there's some way to force rebuilding of xorg after glibc emerges, it wouldn't be a bad idea to do it before unmasking glibc for stable systems.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
IntergalacticWalrus
Guru
Guru


Joined: 07 Jan 2003
Posts: 513
Location: Montreal QC (Canada)

PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2006 3:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Great, now that I've downgraded glibc my system has gone to hell, nothing runs. I've tried untarring the glibc-2.4.tbz2 on my Gentoo root (which I thought would work) but it still won't boot. Any way I can restore my system? (I have not the time nor the patience to reinstall. If I can't restore it, it's goodbye Gentoo for me.)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Gergan Penkov
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 17 Jul 2004
Posts: 1464
Location: das kleinste Kuhdorf Deutschlands :)

PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2006 3:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:

Now that they see the disaster is done

Now they put all the blame unto me

They feel I brought on a curse

Don't they know that the torment

It stays with me knowing that I walk alone

Through the eyes of the future I see

They don't even know what fear is

Don't they know I'm the one who is cursed



Purgatory beckons souls lost forever

Life after death or heaven hereafter

Heard the call of the seven whistlers again

Now Lucifer laughs hell awaits



The Prophecy - Iron Maiden


Have tried to chroot from livecd after you have extracted the tarball.
If you could chroot to it you could start recompiling the glibc, system and the kernel.
if not what for errors do you have?
_________________
"I knew when an angel whispered into my ear,
You gotta get him away, yeah
Hey little bitch!
Be glad you finally walked away or you may have not lived another day."
Godsmack
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
IntergalacticWalrus
Guru
Guru


Joined: 07 Jan 2003
Posts: 513
Location: Montreal QC (Canada)

PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2006 4:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Gergan Penkov wrote:
Have tried to chroot from livecd after you have extracted the tarball.
If you could chroot to it you could start recompiling the glibc, system and the kernel.
if not what for errors do you have?

Can't chroot to it, I get
Code:
/bin/bash: relocation error: /lib/tls/libc.so.6: symbol _dl_out_of_memory, version GLIBC_PRIVATE not defined in file ld-linux.so.2 with link time reference

Same thing if I attempt to boot, only replace /bin/bash with init.

(BTW this isn't from a livecd, I'm currently on a SUSE installation on the same machine, which will permanently become what I'll use in the future if I can't fix this issue.)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
nesl247
Veteran
Veteran


Joined: 15 Jun 2004
Posts: 1614
Location: Florida

PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2006 4:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

IntergalacticWalrus wrote:
Great, now that I've downgraded glibc my system has gone to hell, nothing runs. I've tried untarring the glibc-2.4.tbz2 on my Gentoo root (which I thought would work) but it still won't boot. Any way I can restore my system? (I have not the time nor the patience to reinstall. If I can't restore it, it's goodbye Gentoo for me.)


As far as I know, there is no method, but I maybe wrong.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
IntergalacticWalrus
Guru
Guru


Joined: 07 Jan 2003
Posts: 513
Location: Montreal QC (Canada)

PostPosted: Wed Mar 15, 2006 4:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't understand. I put back glibc-2.4. Why does it still not work?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Portage & Programming All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 2 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum