Problems building trunk on T2-8.0 install

My build host is the latest 8.0-stable image i downloaded from the T2
binary download, all packages installed.

After failing to build our custom target(Atronix), I tried the Generic
Minimal target.
I had to Emerge-pkg python to get past the glib in stage 0.

Now I have issues with e2fsprogs in stage 1, and I can't figure out
what the error actually is...it seem to build and install, the saying
due to previous errors, log file was not created.

I have attached the ERROR-LOG from the src directory and the log file
from var/adm/logs on the build tree.

I hope that someone will be able to answer this as i have noticed very
little activity on this list lately and start wondering if t2 SDE is
now abandon ware and no longer actively used by anyone.

If anyone have built t2-trunk in it's current configuration on a
t2-8.0 system and know whats missing/fails, i would appreciate any
help to resolve this.

Mikael

Re: Error building util-linux on trunk- found the issue, but see inside for new issue.

After reading about about release .26 of pkgconfig is seem to conflict
with alot  of build anvironments.
Have this been successfully used with 9.0-trunk?

I have restarted my build after downgrading to release .25...will see
how it goes.

Thanks
Mikael

On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Mikael Ostensson <mikaelo <at> gmail.com> wrote:
> Ok found out what the problem was: pkgconfig had not been built.
>
> However that package in turn had been commented out due to failure to
> find glib.h etc...in stage 0
> After creating a few symlinks I passed stage 0, but now it fails in
> stage 1 with:
>
> !> configure: error: pkg-config and glib-2.0 not found, please set
> GLIB_CFLAGS and GLIB_LIBS to the correct values.
>
> Full log attached.
>
>
>
> On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 11:12 AM, Mikael Ostensson <mikaelo <at> gmail.com> wrote:
>> BTW the file was generated by autoconf 2.68
>> I have attached the generated Configure file.
>>
>> On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 10:05 AM, Mikael Ostensson <mikaelo <at> gmail.com> wrote:

Error building util-linux on trunk

I just started to attempt to build with a custom target (Rene built
initial version for us)

Host system: Ubuntu 12.04
Package: base/util-linux [2.18 9.0-trunk]
Attached Error.log

Message during build:

checking whether to build static libraries... yes
./configure: line 11650: PKG_PROG_PKG_CONFIG: command not found
./configure: line 11673: syntax error near unexpected token `gtk-doc'
./configure: line 11673: `    PKG_CHECK_EXISTS(gtk-doc >= 1.10,,'
make: *** [config.status] Error 2
Due to previous errors, no 1-util-linux.log file!
(Try enabling xtrace in the config to track an error inside the build system.)

Am I missing something on the host system? This error was not straight
forward to me to resolve, and I need some help in this.

Thanks
Mikael

build RPM or Debian pkgs

dietlibc and gcc 4.7

Janitor task

Hey folks,

for newcomers, and people who like to see new sources, educate and learn, I have a Janitor task. As usually
updating to a new, stricter, compiler, the update to GCC-4.7
(http://t2-project.org/packages/gcc.html) brought a number of new build errors. Obviously, as
expected, ... One thing, they constantly clean header, includes, not only for standard conformance, but
also speedup builds. So some very easy things to fix, are missing includes and thus undeclared identifiers:

grep "error: .*not declared" build/reference-9.0-trunk-reference-x86-i686-linux/var/adm/logs/*.err

Of course there are many more, usually C++, errors due more standard compliance.

PS: If you have no time, or basic C experience yourself, maybe spread the word to pupils, students near you!

Happy easter and patches welcome!

	René
--

-- 
  René Rebe, ExactCODE GmbH, Jaegerstr. 67, DE-10117 Berlin
  http://exactcode.com | http://t2-project.org | http://rene.rebe.de

Sparc32 fails at udev

T2 (mips64) build issues and possibility to avoid Dietlib

hello all.

found couple of issues on the way while building mips64 target (on both 8.0 and trunk-r30450).

.1 has anybody noticed incorrect options handling in scripts/Download with -mirror, -nock -all/-required? (not mips specific anyway!)

.2 the perl build fails on cross build; is the Makefile patch for using 'miniperl' and 'HOST_CC' required?

.3 do those pciaccess, alsa-utils and the further dependancies build correctly?

may be small issues, but makes me wonder has anybody used T2 to build mips64 target out-of-box?

with this background let me put my intentions: i'm actually evaluating T2 for a new target/architecture that we are designing. the Dietlibc hasn't been ported+built and intend to use glibc/newlib all the way. please excuse if this is a naive question: is it possible to build a Generic, Embedded, and rescue targets without Dietlib?

any info/help and advice in this regards will be greatly appreciated!

many thanks.

girish.

Re: [RFC] renaming linux26 pkg to just linux

Hi Roger,

On Mar 14, 2012, at 9:46 PM, Roger Mason wrote:

> Hi Rene,
> 
> On 14-Mar-12, at 8:22 AM, René Rebe wrote:
> 
>> Hey all,
>> 
>> I have a Request For Comment: Since the unforeseen version bump of the Linux kernel from 2.6.x to 3.x, ...
our primary OS kernel package "limux26" is a little misnamed.
>> 
>> If the rename would be easy, I would have long renamed the linux26 pkg to linxu3, ... but it requires
touching much more than a dozen files, ...
>> 
>> While thinking we should finally address this, I came to the conclusion I would like to delete the quite
obsolete linux24 package, and rename the linux26 package just "linux".
>> 
>> Any thoughts on this?
>> 
>> 	René
> 
> I have no problem with this, but my response is, perhaps, naiive as I don't understand what consequences
there may be, if any.

For one thing this was to find out if anyone screams about loosing "linux24"  A rename of the majorly used
package "linux" means many other, e.g. architecture and target overloads, need to be adapted, etc., …
not to mention shared file conflicts on user systems when they emerge an update which will clash between
"linux26" and "linux", … though "linux" without number prefix is much nicer, matches to the
"linux-header" package, … and is certainly nice in the long run.

Cheers,

--

-- 
 René Rebe, ExactCODE GmbH, Jaegerstr. 67, DE-10117 Berlin
 http://exactcode.com | http://t2-project.org | http://rene.rebe.de

[RFC] renaming linux26 pkg to just linux

Hey all,

I have a Request For Comment: Since the unforeseen version bump of the Linux kernel from 2.6.x to 3.x, ... our
primary OS kernel package "limux26" is a little misnamed.

If the rename would be easy, I would have long renamed the linux26 pkg to linxu3, ... but it requires touching
much more than a dozen files, ...

While thinking we should finally address this, I came to the conclusion I would like to delete the quite
obsolete linux24 package, and rename the linux26 package just "linux".

Any thoughts on this?

	René

--

-- 
  René Rebe, ExactCODE GmbH, Jaegerstr. 67, DE-10117 Berlin
  http://exactcode.com | http://t2-project.org | http://rene.rebe.de

glib 2.30.2