Re: two glibcs with different version

On 04/30/2010 06:24 AM, Kraus Philipp wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I must test a software with a older version of the glibc. I run the 2.11.1
 > now but for one tool I need a previous version (2.6.1).

> How can I compile the glibc without changing my system glibc. I would like
 > to set the previous glibc with the LD_PATH.

> Can I run two different versions or is a better solution to downgrade the
 > system glib?

I know just barely enough to tell you to STOP and wait for expert advice
before you attempt ANYTHING.  I can't give you any correct advice except
that you should make a complete backup of your entire system NOW because
your chances of doing what you want are very slim before you destroy your
operating system.

For now, just make complete backups of everything -- and then do nothing
more until an expert gives you better advice than mine.

No, really, don't do it yet.  Really!  (And burn a bootable gentoo rescue
CD/DVD while your machine is still working.)

Any experts out there who can give better advice?

Re: two glibcs with different version

Kraus Philipp <philipp.kraus <at> flashpixx.de> writes:

> Hello,
>
> I must test a software with a older version of the glibc. I run the
> 2.11.1 now but for one tool I need a previous version (2.6.1).
> How can I compile the glibc without changing my system glibc. I would
> like to set the previous glibc with the LD_PATH.
> Can I run two different versions or is a better solution to downgrade
> the system glib?

I think that the only way you can do this is to create a chroot jail,
in which you build everything using the old version of glibc (in a very
similar way to building a new Gentoo system) and run your application in
that. 

Re: two glibcs with different version

On 01.05.2010 um 09:48 wrote Graham Murray:

> I think that the only way you can do this is to create a chroot jail,
> in which you build everything using the old version of glibc (in a  
> very
> similar way to building a new Gentoo system) and run your  
> application in
> that.

That's a very goog idea, because the programm is a network service.
Do you know a tutorial for creating root jails in this way?

Thanks

Re: two glibcs with different version

On Samstag 01 Mai 2010, Graham Murray wrote:
> Kraus Philipp <philipp.kraus <at> flashpixx.de> writes:
> > Hello,
> > 
> > I must test a software with a older version of the glibc. I run the
> > 2.11.1 now but for one tool I need a previous version (2.6.1).
> > How can I compile the glibc without changing my system glibc. I would
> > like to set the previous glibc with the LD_PATH.
> > Can I run two different versions or is a better solution to downgrade
> > the system glib?
> 
> I think that the only way you can do this is to create a chroot jail,
> in which you build everything using the old version of glibc (in a very
> similar way to building a new Gentoo system) and run your application in
> that.

no, you can install glibc in /usr/local and then tell apps to either use the 
libs in /usr/local or /usr.

It is just not easy because it easily breaks stuff in horrrible to fix ways. 

Re: Compiling 32 bit library on x86_64

On 04/30/2010 07:29 PM, David W Noon wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Apr 2010 15:20:02 +0200, Nikos Chantziaras wrote about
> [gentoo-user] Re: Compiling 32 bit library on x86_64:
>
>> On 04/30/2010 03:09 PM, David W Noon wrote:
>>> On Fri, 30 Apr 2010 12:10:02 +0200, Roger Mason wrote about
>>> [gentoo-user] Compiling 32 bit library on x86_64:
>>>
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> I need to compile a 32 bit version of libtermcap on an x86_64
>>>> (multilib) system.  Can someone tell me how to set up CFLAGS?  This
>>>> is what I have at the moment:
>>>>
>>>> CFLAGS="-O2 -m32 -march=native -msse3 -pipe"
>>>> CXXFLAGS="-O2 -m32 -march=native -msse3 -pipe"
>>>
>>> The -march=native will shoot you in the foot. Pick a 32-bit
>>> architecture and use that instead; e.g. -march=i686
>>>
>>> Then, -msse3 could also be problematic, unless the target is a very
>>> late model Pentium 4.  I would ditch that too.
>>
>> None of those options are problematic.  -march=native has nothing to
>> do with 32/64 bit.  Every 64-bit CPU is 32-bit compatible and has zero
>> consequence.
>>
>> I think you fell into the logical trap that 32-bit CPUs are not 64-bit
>> compatible but it's OK vice versa :)  Meaning you can't use "-m64
>> -march=i686".  But you *can* and *should* use "-m32 -march=core2".

Re: two glibcs with different version

Re: Compiling 32 bit library on x86_64

Mike Edenfield <kutulu <at> kutulu.org> writes:

> On 4/30/2010 12:40 PM, Roger Mason wrote:
>> Mike Edenfield <kutulu <at> kutulu.org> writes:
>> 
>>> Have you tried using sys-devel/crossdev?
>> 
>> Not in the present context.
>> 
>>> It will set up the entire 32-bit cross-compiler environment for you;
>>> then it's just a matter of setting a couple of environment variables to
>>> switch compilers.
>> 
>> Some time ago I tried setting up cross-compilation so that I could use a
>> rather heterogeneous collection of amd64, ppc and x86 machines in
>> icecream.  Unfortunately I could not get cross-compilation to work.  I
>> asked about it in this forum but did not get any replies.
>
> I have it set up on my laptop. I admit it's been a while since I used
> it, but I know it worked at one point.
>
> Though I was using it on a standard PC, the best source of information I
> found on the process was the Gentoo Embedded Handbook:
>
>
> http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/base/embedded/handbook/?part=1
>
> The whole first section is on setting up a cross-compiler, just
> substitute i686-pc-linux-gnu for your target architecture.

Ah, thank you.  I'll have another go at it this summer.

Roger

Re: two glibcs with different version

On Sat, 2010-05-01 at 10:57 +0200, Kraus Philipp wrote:
> 
> On 01.05.2010 um 10:32 wrote Volker Armin Hemmann:
> 
> > On Samstag 01 Mai 2010, Graham Murray wrote:
> > > Kraus Philipp <philipp.kraus <at> flashpixx.de> writes:
> > > > Hello,
> > > > 
> > > > I must test a software with a older version of the glibc. I run
> > > > the
> > > > 2.11.1 now but for one tool I need a previous version (2.6.1).
> > > > How can I compile the glibc without changing my system glibc. I
> > > > would
> > > > like to set the previous glibc with the LD_PATH.
> > > > Can I run two different versions or is a better solution to
> > > > downgrade
> > > > the system glib?
> > > 
> > > I think that the only way you can do this is to create a chroot
> > > jail,
> > > in which you build everything using the old version of glibc (in a
> > > very
> > > similar way to building a new Gentoo system) and run your
> > > application in
> > > that.
> > 
> > no, you can install glibc in /usr/local and then tell apps to either
> > use the 
> > libs in /usr/local or /usr.
> > 
> > It is just not easy because it easily breaks stuff in horrrible to
> > fix ways. 
> > 
> 
> 
> Okay, can I downgrade my glibc? My Gentoo isn't a big system, it's a
> server
> installation, so I can recompile the whole system. I had forgotten to
> mask the
> glibc on the last update. I have add a line to the portage.mask but
> emerge says
> that it can't compile the older version, because will damage the
> system.
> 
> 

Would LD_PRELOAD solve your problem? - worked for me when needing to run
a legacy redhat app in the past on a more up-to-date gentoo system. 

There is also a LD_LIBRARY_PATH variable.  Get a binary copy of the libs
you need and put em somewhere convenient and let the rest of the system
stay as is.

google for LD_PRELOAD.

BillK

convert google newsgroup digest to mbox

Hello.

Does anybody know if there is an application to convert to the mbox
format the email messages sent by groups.google.com in a digest format
to the group subscribers (if the subscriber choosed this format)?

Romildo

Re: two glibcs with different version