Building glibc-2.3.2 pass1 with static gcc hangs

Ken Moffat ken at kenmoffat.uklinux.net
Mon May 17 14:28:46 PDT 2004


On Mon, 17 May 2004, Joerg Hahn wrote:

> Moin
>
> Thanks for helping me. I ask first, and than looked for the solution.
> I'm sorry.
>
> >  I don't follow you.  The first things we build are binutils and gcc,
> > after that we're using a gcc we've built (look where /tools/bin is on
> > your PATH).  As an aside, when did gcc-3.0 get into woody ?  My version
> > of Woody had 2.95.4.
>
> gcc-3.0 isn't in the PATH normally. I installed it some times ago.
>

 OK, but I think you originally said something about using the gcc in
/tools/bin which is what you are supposed to be doing (as soon as
something is built in /tools, we start to use it because bash's hashing
is switched off).

> >  There isn't exactly a lot to go wrong in those lines, is there ?  The
> > only things that come to mind are that either echo or /dev/null are
> > behaving oddly.  In any sane package, this sort of test would be done
> > during `configure', but from what you say it sounds as if this is during
> > the build.
>
> This behavior comes up in "make check" in the iconvdata directory. I
> fixed it. I think it was the LC_ALL=POSIX that was missing. I did not
> read anything till now, but what is so dangerous about not setting
> LC_ALL? Where is the explanation for it?
>

 Search me, locales give me nothing but grief :-)

> >  (echo "testing\c"; echo 1,2,3) | grep c >/dev/null; echo $?
>
> It works fine and gives a 0. I tried to add an echo, too. I found out
> that a grep was very busy kicking the break of my system. The added echo
> never wrote anything on the screen. As I wrote, I stopped the grep after
> 10 or 15 minutes. BTW LC_ALL isn't set. I don't understand the
> difference between these two sutuations.
>

 I think you'll have to give us a little more detail.  What exactly did
you type in that caused grep to "hang" ?  And I'll ask again, are you
using something other than bash as the shell ?

 Did you use debian's tools to add the lfs user ?  If you did, it might
have added more than you wanted - have a look at what printenv shows
you.

Ken
-- 
 das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce




More information about the lfs-support mailing list