6.11 - Glibc-2.3.4 - /tools/bin/gcc: No such file or directory

Chakkaradeep C C chaks.lfs at gmail.com
Tue May 31 01:40:38 PDT 2005


> > ../glibc-2.3.4-20040701/configure: line 2622: /tools/bin/gcc: No such
> > file or directory
> > configure:2624: $? = 127
> > configure: failed program was:

i too got the same error.........this means that there is no "gcc"
installed in our system and not host system...........this also tells
us that gcc is not been installed properly...

> > When trying to actually use the compiler from the new chrooted environment
> > (remember glibc is the first source actually -compiled- in Ch. 6) I get the
> > "No such file or directory" error. A quick FAQ search made me try this command:
> >
> > [shell]$ readelf -l /tools/bin/gcc | grep interpreter
> >     [Requested program interpreter: /lib/ld-linux.so.2]

this should not happen and u should get /tools/lib/ld-linux.so.2 as
mentioned in the docs...

> > So I thought I got all occurences but I was tired, vim didn't have
> > syntax highlighting for regex searches, and basically I could have
> > missed some. While adjusting the Ch.5 temporary toolchain, I wrote
> > that C file and ran the new compiler, then the readelf command as
> > shown in the big yellow box, to a tee. What made me keep going and not
> > retry anything was the fact that I infact -did- get the expected
> > results of the readelf command from Ch.5:
> >
> > [shell]$ readelf -l a.out | grep interpreter
> >     /tools/lib/ld-linux.so.2

> > My host system is a fairly fresh Fedora Core 3 system, with minimal
> > tools except development tools installed, basically for the sole
> > purpose of installing LFS successfully for the first time.

i have completed LFS by having FC-3 as my base system....... :-)

> A) Do I have to step back out of my chroot jail to fix this problem? I
> imagine I should step back to at least Chapter 5.8 - Glibc-2.3.4
> installation for the first pass, and try again (this time harder!) at
> the sed script to update the platforms dynamic linker. I obviously
> didn't weigh the importance of that script and now I'm in trouble.
> B) Assuming the answer to question A is a 'yes, step back', is it
> recommended that I totally restart from that point? Until now I have
> just been sequentially stepping forward with no errors until now. I'm
> a little cautious chartering out into umarked waters, but I'm
> installing this on a slow system (for instance: 7 SBU's is about 2-3
> hours time). I have made lots of forward progress and unless all
> further tools such as Perl, grep, sed and other 'non-core' toolchain
> programs are linked to the old system, it would be alot faster if I
> could keep them in place.

when i got the same problem i did a research of my logs and noticed
that i missed some few steps along with "ln -s gcc
/tools/bin/cc"....now this is a problem....i restarted my whole
process only in the intention that my toolchain should not

> C) Is Fedora Core 3 a decent base system? I just may be tempted with
> my new knowledge to download the LFS bootable CD, and install it on my
> desktop. I really wanted to complete this installation on my test
> computer first though, newer hardware in my desktop could cause
> trouble.

getting LFS CD is a gud idea and also choosing FC-3 as ur base system
is not a bad idea.... :-) ...FC-3 is gud for building LFS........i
have completed it successfully.....u may face few problems becoz of
the latest tools used in FC-3 , one such example is while you use
"fsck" command, the fsck version in fc-3 is newer than LFS and will
create problems while checking file system......solution would be
installing the latest e2fsprogs tool in LFS...

i would suggest  u to restart ur work so that u wont break ur tool-chain

with regards,

More information about the lfs-support mailing list