Tweaked glibc 2.4 + 2.5 + snapshot ebuilds

Message

7seven7 · Post by **7seven7** » Wed May 24, 2006 10:30 am

Does binutils-2.16.93 supports -Bdirect or it needs to be patched?
Where i can find the binutils changelog?

xbb · Post by **xbb** » Wed May 24, 2006 6:16 pm

7seven7 wrote:Does binutils-2.16.93 supports -Bdirect or it needs to be patched?
Where i can find the binutils changelog?

patched successfully with 2.16.92 patches, no problems yet.

AlphaHeX · Post by **AlphaHeX** » Thu May 25, 2006 1:27 pm

Where I can find binutils-2.16.9x ebuilds ?

nesl247 · Post by **nesl247** » Thu May 25, 2006 1:29 pm

xbb wrote:
7seven7 wrote:Does binutils-2.16.93 supports -Bdirect or it needs to be patched?
Where i can find the binutils changelog?
patched successfully with 2.16.92 patches, no problems yet.

Same here.

7seven7 · Post by **7seven7** » Thu May 25, 2006 2:44 pm

AlphaHeX wrote:Where I can find binutils-2.16.9x ebuilds ?

They are in portage

nesl247 · Post by **nesl247** » Fri May 26, 2006 1:41 am

nxsty, any ETA on the next snapshot? The current one doesn't work (won't compile for me)

AlphaHeX · Post by **AlphaHeX** » Fri May 26, 2006 9:12 am

AlphaHeX wrote:
Where I can find binutils-2.16.9x ebuilds ?

They are in portage

But they don't contain hashvals,bdirect and dynsort patches

Where I can find 2.16.9x ebuilds with these patches ?

lnxz · Post by **lnxz** » Fri May 26, 2006 11:36 am

There are links to two binutils overlays in the first post of this thread, both of which include mentioned patches, I believe.

nesl247 · Post by **nesl247** » Fri May 26, 2006 1:01 pm

Mine is down at the moment, but if you email me at nesl247 @ gmail.com, I will send it to you. (It is the updated .93 one)

abhay · Post by **abhay** » Sat May 27, 2006 5:18 pm

Does binutils-2.16.93 solve the prelink bug? Can someone please confirm who is using this version?

steve_d555 · Post by **steve_d555** » Sun May 28, 2006 7:53 am

abhay wrote:Does binutils-2.16.93 solve the prelink bug? Can someone please confirm who is using this version?

I'm not exactly sure what the prelink bug is but I can not prelink using nesl247's 2.16.93 binutils. I get bounds errors and segfaults after prelink supposedly works (/sbin/init U)

Xake · Post by **Xake** » Sun May 28, 2006 8:41 am

steve_d555 wrote:
abhay wrote:Does binutils-2.16.93 solve the prelink bug? Can someone please confirm who is using this version?
I'm not exactly sure what the prelink bug is but I can not prelink using nesl247's 2.16.93 binutils. I get bounds errors and segfaults after prelink supposedly works (/sbin/init U)

I believe this is what he refers to, and my comment is: why prelink? Have seen mail conversations indicating bdirect is something to use instead of prelink with the same/better results.

abhay · Post by **abhay** » Sun May 28, 2006 6:28 pm

steve_d555 wrote:I'm not exactly sure what the prelink bug is but I can not prelink using nesl247's 2.16.93 binutils. I get bounds errors and segfaults after prelink supposedly works (/sbin/init U)

Yes that is what I was referring to. Thanks for clarifying it.

As for why prelink? Well if you have prelink and put KDE_IS_PRELINKED in env files then you reduce the number of running KDEINIT processes. It does save a few MBs of RAM and seems effective but since Bdirect seems to be the newer thing, I am going all for it

Balancer · Post by **Balancer** » Mon May 29, 2006 8:08 am

_dA_CyANIDe wrote:Hello,

i have problem with #error "TLS support is required." again, while i want to upgrade from 2.3.91.20060303 to 2.4

Thx 4 advice

...

_dA_CyANIDe wrote:Hmm...strange gcc-config 1 solve this problem.

Everything works fine. before. :-\

I have this error when try use default profile on any compination of compilers. Now it:

Code: Select all

# eselect compiler list
Available compilers for CTARGET i686-pc-linux-gnu
  [1]   i686-pc-linux-gnu-4.1.0/vanilla
  [2]   x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-3.4.6/x86-hardened
  [3]   x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-3.4.6/x86-hardenednopie
  [4]   x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-3.4.6/x86-hardenednopiessp
  [5]   x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-3.4.6/x86-hardenednossp
  [6]   x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-3.4.6/x86-vanilla
Available compilers for CTARGET x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
  [7]   x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-3.4.6/amd64-hardened
  [8]   x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-3.4.6/amd64-hardenednopie
  [9]   x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-3.4.6/amd64-hardenednopiessp
  [10]  x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-3.4.6/amd64-hardenednossp
  [11]  x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-3.4.6/amd64-vanilla
  [12]  x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-4.1.1/vanilla

Activated profiles:
  i686-pc-linux-gnu         x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-3.4.6/x86-vanilla
  x86_64-pc-linux-gnu *     x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-3.4.6/amd64-vanilla

If I use no-multilib profile, then all compiled ok. But I need to run 32-bit applications (opera, openoffice-bin etc.)

Do have any ideas?

(sorry for badly English)

_dA_CyANIDe · Post by **_dA_CyANIDe** » Mon May 29, 2006 3:59 pm

Please post :

Code: Select all

binutils-config -l

If you have only one version of binutils, then try to re-select by :

Code: Select all

binutils-config {number of version}

SteveYin · Post by **SteveYin** » Tue May 30, 2006 4:53 am

I think you guys can find binutils overlay here http://dev.gentoo.org/~flameeyes/bzr/overlay/

and also, there are some more apps. thanks to Diego Petten¨° (flameeyes), ps, I found this info on planet gentoo.

Balancer · Post by **Balancer** » Tue May 30, 2006 7:33 am

_dA_CyANIDe wrote:Please post :
Code: Select all
binutils-config -l

Code: Select all

# eselect binutils list
Installed binutils for target i686-pc-linux-gnu
  [1]   2.16.1
  [2]   2.16.91.0.6 *
Installed binutils for target x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
  [3]   2.16
  [4]   2.16.1
  [5]   2.16.93 *

# binutils-config -l
 [1] i686-pc-linux-gnu-2.16.1
 [2] i686-pc-linux-gnu-2.16.91.0.6 *

 [3] x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-2.16
 [4] x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-2.16.1
 [5] x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-2.16.93 *

I tried different combinations.

Balancer · Post by **Balancer** » Tue May 30, 2006 7:34 am

Support for TLS provides binutils?

OddFox · Post by **OddFox** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 6:30 am

Hello again nxsty I just want to say first and foremost before I pose my question that your overlays are amazing, my system has never been faster and of course I've been using your glibc overlay specifically since it was the new kid on the block with the amd64 patches. However, on my system I'm having some issues that I hope you can help me identify as far as what's causing the issue. Right now I'm starting to think it's a problem with me using linux-headers-2.6.16. I cannot start Opera nor Firefox-bin. Here's the message Opera spits out:

Code: Select all

ERROR: ld.so: object 'libjvm.so' from LD_PRELOAD cannot be preloaded: ignored.
ERROR: ld.so: object 'libawt.so' from LD_PRELOAD cannot be preloaded: ignored.
*** glibc detected *** /opt/opera/lib/opera/8.54-20060330.5/opera: double free or corruption (out): 0x088310c8 ***
Aborted

Here's the message Firefox-bin spits out:

Code: Select all

No running windows found
     17550:      impossible error - can't find 'ld-linux.so.2'
     17550:      impossible error - can't find 'libc.so.6'
     17550:      impossible error - can't find 'ld-linux.so.2'
/usr/libexec/mozilla-launcher: line 117: 17550 Segmentation fault      "$mozbin" "$@"
firefox-bin exited with non-zero status (139)

If those problems seem unrelated to the versions of glibc and friends that I'm using just go ahead and let me know and I'll edit the post down for cleanliness, but I really am at the end of my rope trying to troubleshoot it because apparently nobody else in the world is having the same issue, I've searched and searched. Thanks in advance for any advice you or anyone else can offer!

EDIT: By the way, here are my installed software versions:

sys-devel/gcc-4.1.1
sys-libs/glibc-2.4.90.20060516
sys-devel/binutils-2.16.91.0.6
sys-kernel/linux-headers-2.6.16

Second EDIT: Mozilla-bin works fine, turns out. I wonder what it could be when it's selective like this? At least I can view flash now.

FireBurn · Post by **FireBurn** » Thu Jun 01, 2006 7:07 pm

HAve you tried simply using firefox rather than firefox-bin?

OddFox · Post by **OddFox** » Fri Jun 02, 2006 12:35 am

FireBurn wrote:HAve you tried simply using firefox rather than firefox-bin?

Yes and it works just fine. The issue was that up until I tested the latest mozilla-bin, I had no way to view sites that used Flash, seeing as how I had no access to a 32-bit browser. I ran into a media-heavy site the other day that kept crashing Firefox, but that's the only problem I've had with it thus far.

jsnorman · Post by **jsnorman** » Fri Jun 02, 2006 6:15 am

OddFox wrote:Here's the message Opera spits out:
Code: Select all
ERROR: ld.so: object 'libjvm.so' from LD_PRELOAD cannot be preloaded: ignored.
ERROR: ld.so: object 'libawt.so' from LD_PRELOAD cannot be preloaded: ignored.
*** glibc detected *** /opt/opera/lib/opera/8.54-20060330.5/opera: double free or corruption (out): 0x088310c8 ***
Aborted
Here's the message Firefox-bin spits out:
Code: Select all
No running windows found
     17550:      impossible error - can't find 'ld-linux.so.2'
     17550:      impossible error - can't find 'libc.so.6'
     17550:      impossible error - can't find 'ld-linux.so.2'
/usr/libexec/mozilla-launcher: line 117: 17550 Segmentation fault      "$mozbin" "$@"
firefox-bin exited with non-zero status (139)
If those problems seem unrelated to the versions of glibc and friends that I'm using just go ahead and let me know and I'll edit the post down for cleanliness, but I really am at the end of my rope trying to troubleshoot it because apparently nobody else in the world is having the same issue, I've searched and searched. Thanks in advance for any advice you or anyone else can offer!

Second EDIT: Mozilla-bin works fine, turns out. I wonder what it could be when it's selective like this? At least I can view flash now.

I have had similar problems when I upgraded to GCC 4.1.0. I since discovered that my upgrade of GCC had messed up a bunch of libraries that previously were built with GCC 3.6 and somehow were no longer compatible. It still makes no sense to me why a compiler upgrade can introduce library inconsistencies, but whatever .. it definitely does. So, did you use emwrap.sh or just emerge when you upgraded to GCC 4.1.1? If the latter, pull up version 4.0.5 of heilv's emwrap.sh script in Unsupported, and run -

Code: Select all

emwrap.sh -seb
emwrap.sh -we
emwrap.sh -W

**warning: this will take a few days to complete***

If you did use emwrap.sh, did you use verify that it did not automatically revert to GCC 3.6 halfway through (this could be the case if after "finishing" emwrap, gcc-config -l suddenly dhows 3.6).

OddFox · Post by **OddFox** » Fri Jun 02, 2006 7:52 am

Thank you so much for the input jsnorman, I will definitely take those steps when I have the time alotted to do so. I'm curious, though, what hardware takes days to perform those actions on?

Oi, that's a rainy day project indeed, 'tis.

EDIT: And for what it's worth I did just use emerge, no scripts, for any of my upgrade processes whether it's Glibc, GCC, etc... I don't really trust scripts usually unless I have no better options.

jsnorman · Post by **jsnorman** » Fri Jun 02, 2006 10:17 am

OddFox wrote:Thank you so much for the input jsnorman, I will definitely take those steps when I have the time alotted to do so. I'm curious, though, what hardware takes days to perform those actions on?

Oi, that's a rainy day project indeed, 'tis.

EDIT: And for what it's worth I did just use emerge, no scripts, for any of my upgrade processes whether it's Glibc, GCC, etc... I don't really trust scripts usually unless I have no better options.

Takes days on dual opteron 860 (dual core, so four processor) with 4gb ram!!! Its generally a pretty peppy system.

Yes, I know, hard to believe but true.

You need the script, take a look at the thread...http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-282474.html

The gist of it is that you need to build and rebuild glibc, gcc, binutils a couple of times, and then follow with building all system libraries against the rebuilt TC, and then rebuilt the TC again with the properly built system libraries, and finally rebuilt world with the properly built TC and system libraries ... it could be done by hand but it would take a week then.

FireBurn · Post by **FireBurn** » Fri Jun 02, 2006 11:46 am

OddFox wrote:
FireBurn wrote:HAve you tried simply using firefox rather than firefox-bin?
Yes and it works just fine. The issue was that up until I tested the latest mozilla-bin, I had no way to view sites that used Flash, seeing as how I had no access to a 32-bit browser. I ran into a media-heavy site the other day that kept crashing Firefox, but that's the only problem I've had with it thus far.

Have you tried http://www.gnu.org/software/gnash/