[gentoo-user] Changing CHOST

[gentoo-user] Changing CHOST

[David Relson]

Now that my old AthlonXP mobo has been replaced by an AMD 64 X2 mobo,
it's time for upgrading CHOST :->

According to http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/change-chost.xml after a
couple of changes to /etc/make.conf, i.e.

  from:
       USE="x86 ..."
       CHOST="i686-pc-linux-gnu"
       CFLAGS="-O2 -march=athlon-xp -pipe"

  to:
      USE="amd64 ..."
      CHOST="amd64-pc-linux-gnu"
      CFLAGS="-O2 -march=x86-64 -pipe"

The next step is:

    emerge -av1 binutils gcc glibc

The emerge of binutils works fine.  However the emerge of gcc fails
with:

  In file included from .../gcc/unwind-dw2.c:257:
  gcc/config/i386/linux-unwind.h: In function
     'x86_64_fallback_frame_state': 
  gcc/config/i386/linux-unwind.h:63:
    error: 'struct sigcontext' has no member named 'rsp'

A quick search of BGO didn't show anything relevant.

Any suggestions???

Thanks.

David
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Changing CHOST

[Bo Ørsted Andresen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 812 bytes --]

On Sunday 23 September 2007 02:13:46 David Relson wrote:
> Now that my old AthlonXP mobo has been replaced by an AMD 64 X2 mobo,
> it's time for upgrading CHOST :->
>
> According to http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/change-chost.xml after a
> couple of changes to /etc/make.conf, i.e.
>
>   from:
>        USE="x86 ..."
>        CHOST="i686-pc-linux-gnu"
>        CFLAGS="-O2 -march=athlon-xp -pipe"
>
>   to:
>       USE="amd64 ..."
>       CHOST="amd64-pc-linux-gnu"
>       CFLAGS="-O2 -march=x86-64 -pipe"
[SNIP]

Changing CHOST is valid when you have e.g. an i386 CHOST and want to change it 
to i686. It is not an option for going from 32 bit to 64 bit. You need to 
reinstall. Also.. don't set x86 or amd64 in USE manually! And finally x86-64 
is not a valid march...

-- 
Bo Andresen

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Changing CHOST

[Albert Hopkins]

On Sun, 2007-09-23 at 03:43 +0200, Bo Ørsted Andresen wrote:
> Changing CHOST is valid when you have e.g. an i386 CHOST and want to
> change it 
> to i686. It is not an option for going from 32 bit to 64 bit. You need
> to 
> reinstall. 

Below is what I did a few years ago.  YMMV.  There may be a better guide
on the Wiki or somewhere.

--
Albert W. Hopkins

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Changing CHOST

[Albert Hopkins]

Oops, forgot to paste the link:

http://starship.python.net/crew/marduk/blog/entry/1112117933.9,14473

--
Albert W. Hopkins

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Changing CHOST

[Volker Armin Hemmann]

On Sonntag, 23. September 2007, David Relson wrote:
> Now that my old AthlonXP mobo has been replaced by an AMD 64 X2 mobo,
> it's time for upgrading CHOST :->
>
> According to http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/change-chost.xml after a
> couple of changes to /etc/make.conf, i.e.
>
>   from:
>        USE="x86 ..."
>        CHOST="i686-pc-linux-gnu"
>        CFLAGS="-O2 -march=athlon-xp -pipe"
>
>   to:
>       USE="amd64 ..."
>       CHOST="amd64-pc-linux-gnu"
>       CFLAGS="-O2 -march=x86-64 -pipe"
>
> The next step is:
>
>     emerge -av1 binutils gcc glibc
>
> The emerge of binutils works fine.  However the emerge of gcc fails
> with:
>
>   In file included from .../gcc/unwind-dw2.c:257:
>   gcc/config/i386/linux-unwind.h: In function
>      'x86_64_fallback_frame_state':
>   gcc/config/i386/linux-unwind.h:63:
>     error: 'struct sigcontext' has no member named 'rsp'
>
> A quick search of BGO didn't show anything relevant.
>
> Any suggestions???
>
> Thanks.
>
> David

boot from cd
mkfs.reiserfs
start stage3 installation.

It is the only safe way. It is faster and much less problematic.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Changing CHOST

[Doug Whitesell]

On Sep 23, 2007, at 5:47 AM, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:

> On Sonntag, 23. September 2007, David Relson wrote:
>> Now that my old AthlonXP mobo has been replaced by an AMD 64 X2 mobo,
>> it's time for upgrading CHOST :->
>>
>> According to http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/change-chost.xml after a
>> couple of changes to /etc/make.conf, i.e.
>>
>>   from:
>>        USE="x86 ..."
>>        CHOST="i686-pc-linux-gnu"
>>        CFLAGS="-O2 -march=athlon-xp -pipe"
>>
>>   to:
>>       USE="amd64 ..."
>>       CHOST="amd64-pc-linux-gnu"
>>       CFLAGS="-O2 -march=x86-64 -pipe"
>>
>> The next step is:
>>
>>     emerge -av1 binutils gcc glibc
>>
>> The emerge of binutils works fine.  However the emerge of gcc fails
>> with:
>>
>>   In file included from .../gcc/unwind-dw2.c:257:
>>   gcc/config/i386/linux-unwind.h: In function
>>      'x86_64_fallback_frame_state':
>>   gcc/config/i386/linux-unwind.h:63:
>>     error: 'struct sigcontext' has no member named 'rsp'
>>
>> A quick search of BGO didn't show anything relevant.
>>
>> Any suggestions???
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> David
>
> boot from cd
> mkfs.reiserfs
> start stage3 installation.
>
> It is the only safe way. It is faster and much less problematic.
> --  
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>
This is true and is the recommended way; what Albert posted is almost  
effectively a full reinstall.

I would advocate — and have used — the start-from-scratch process.  
Unpredictable result from anything else, and such ... (For some  
reason it's difficult to go from 486 to 686, although by following  
the posted guidelines at gentoo.org I have never had such trouble...)--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Changing CHOST

[Marc Redmann]

> boot from cd

Don't want to start a flame war here, but why should he use reiserfs ??? I 
think he can use whatever filesystem he wishes to ...

> mkfs.reiserfs
> start stage3 installation.

brgds, Marc
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Changing CHOST

[Volker Armin Hemmann]

On Sonntag, 23. September 2007, Marc Redmann wrote:
> > boot from cd
>
> Don't want to start a flame war here, but why should he use reiserfs ??? 

it was an example. And I am free to choose any fs I want for that. Exept jfs. 
Besides reiserfs is a good fs, so no harm done.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] OT - Changing CHOST

[Rumen Yotov]

On Sun, 23 Sep 2007 23:53:11 +0200
Volker Armin Hemmann <volker.armin.hemmann@tu-clausthal.de> wrote:

> On Sonntag, 23. September 2007, Marc Redmann wrote:
> > > boot from cd
> >
> > Don't want to start a flame war here, but why should he use
> > reiserfs ??? 
> 
> it was an example. And I am free to choose any fs I want for that.
> Exept jfs. Besides reiserfs is a good fs, so no harm done.
Hi,

Using reiser4 on / for 2 weeks and can tell it's very fast&stable.
The speedup is impressive (measured by my time-sense :-)
Before that used reiserfs (3.6) for /.
Rumen
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Changing CHOST

[Doug Whitesell]

On Sep 22, 2007, at 5:13 PM, David Relson wrote:

> Now that my old AthlonXP mobo has been replaced by an AMD 64 X2 mobo,
> it's time for upgrading CHOST :->
>
> According to http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/change-chost.xml after a
> couple of changes to /etc/make.conf, i.e.
>
>   from:
>        USE="x86 ..."
>        CHOST="i686-pc-linux-gnu"
>        CFLAGS="-O2 -march=athlon-xp -pipe"
>
>   to:
>       USE="amd64 ..."
>       CHOST="amd64-pc-linux-gnu"
>       CFLAGS="-O2 -march=x86-64 -pipe"
>
> The next step is:
>
>     emerge -av1 binutils gcc glibc
>
> The emerge of binutils works fine.  However the emerge of gcc fails
> with:
>
>   In file included from .../gcc/unwind-dw2.c:257:
>   gcc/config/i386/linux-unwind.h: In function
>      'x86_64_fallback_frame_state':
>   gcc/config/i386/linux-unwind.h:63:
>     error: 'struct sigcontext' has no member named 'rsp'
>
> A quick search of BGO didn't show anything relevant.
>
> Any suggestions???
>
> Thanks.
>
You're getting that _specific_ error because there is no register  
'RSP' (the 64-bit stack pointer in the AMD64 world) in the 32-bit x86  
world. (You have a 32-bit stack pointer 'esp' instead.)
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Changing CHOST

[Mark Shields]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1298 bytes --]

On 9/22/07, David Relson <relson@osagesoftware.com> wrote:
>
> Now that my old AthlonXP mobo has been replaced by an AMD 64 X2 mobo,
> it's time for upgrading CHOST :->
>
> According to http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/change-chost.xml after a
> couple of changes to /etc/make.conf, i.e.
>
>   from:
>        USE="x86 ..."
>        CHOST="i686-pc-linux-gnu"
>        CFLAGS="-O2 -march=athlon-xp -pipe"
>
>   to:
>       USE="amd64 ..."
>       CHOST="amd64-pc-linux-gnu"
>       CFLAGS="-O2 -march=x86-64 -pipe"
>
> The next step is:
>
>     emerge -av1 binutils gcc glibc
>
> The emerge of binutils works fine.  However the emerge of gcc fails
> with:
>
>   In file included from .../gcc/unwind-dw2.c:257:
>   gcc/config/i386/linux-unwind.h: In function
>      'x86_64_fallback_frame_state':
>   gcc/config/i386/linux-unwind.h:63:
>     error: 'struct sigcontext' has no member named 'rsp'
>
> A quick search of BGO didn't show anything relevant.
>
> Any suggestions???
>
> Thanks.
>
> David
> --
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>
Besides what everyone else has already suggested, I would suggest backing up
everything beforehand, or you can continue using your 32-bit environment
with your shiny new 64-bit processor, but you will not be able to use any
64-bit binaries.

-- 
- Mark Shields

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2149 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Changing CHOST

[David Relson]

On Sun, 23 Sep 2007 22:16:03 -0400
Mark Shields wrote:

...[snip]...

> Besides what everyone else has already suggested, I would suggest
> backing up everything beforehand, or you can continue using your
> 32-bit environment with your shiny new 64-bit processor, but you will
> not be able to use any 64-bit binaries.
> 
> -- 
> - Mark Shields

Hi Mark,

Backups happen regularly, so that's not an issue.

I recall installing Gentoo as being a P.I.T.A, hence take no pleasure
in the idea of re-installing.  I was hoping for something relatively
simple, like
   changing CHOST and emerging world
   unpacking amd64 stage3 tarball on top of root
   or something else

Hopefully a year of running Gentoo and emerging regularly and tweaking
config files will make the install less painful.

Regards,

David

P.S.  I did experiment with unpacking the stage3 tarball into a chroot
environment and found that 64-bit ELF executables aren't recognized.
Sigh :-<
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Changing CHOST

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 924 bytes --]

On Sun, 23 Sep 2007 22:38:36 -0400, David Relson wrote:

> I recall installing Gentoo as being a P.I.T.A, hence take no pleasure
> in the idea of re-installing.  I was hoping for something relatively
> simple, like
>    changing CHOST and emerging world
>    unpacking amd64 stage3 tarball on top of root
>    or something else

Unpacking a stage 3 tarball on top of a working system is a good way of
converting it to a non-working system. It will also overwrite many of
your settings in /etc.

If you are going to use a stage 3 tarball as a basis, a clean stage 3
install is by far the safest option, and usually turns out to be the
quickest too. Backup /etc  and your world file first, use your old
make.conf as a starting point and recreate your old environment on the
new hardware with

emerge -1av $(cat oldworld)


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Electric chairs are period furniture: they end a sentence

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Changing CHOST

[Florian Philipp]

Neil Bothwick schrieb:
> On Sun, 23 Sep 2007 22:38:36 -0400, David Relson wrote:
> 
>> I recall installing Gentoo as being a P.I.T.A, hence take no pleasure
>> in the idea of re-installing.  I was hoping for something relatively
>> simple, like
>>    changing CHOST and emerging world
>>    unpacking amd64 stage3 tarball on top of root
>>    or something else
> 
> Unpacking a stage 3 tarball on top of a working system is a good way of
> converting it to a non-working system. It will also overwrite many of
> your settings in /etc.
> 
> If you are going to use a stage 3 tarball as a basis, a clean stage 3
> install is by far the safest option, and usually turns out to be the
> quickest too. Backup /etc  and your world file first, use your old
> make.conf as a starting point and recreate your old environment on the
> new hardware with
> 
> emerge -1av $(cat oldworld)
> 
> 
Just a thought: Is it possible to compile a 64bit kernel and use him on
the current system? That way you could set up your new native 64bit
system in a chroot before overwriting the old one and thus minimize
downtime to less than 15 minutes.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Changing CHOST

[David Relson]

On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 18:17:53 +0200
Florian Philipp wrote:

> Neil Bothwick schrieb:
...[snip]...
> > Unpacking a stage 3 tarball on top of a working system is a good
> > way of converting it to a non-working system. It will also
> > overwrite many of your settings in /etc.
> > 
> > If you are going to use a stage 3 tarball as a basis, a clean stage
> > 3 install is by far the safest option, and usually turns out to be
> > the quickest too. Backup /etc  and your world file first, use your
> > old make.conf as a starting point and recreate your old environment
> > on the new hardware with
> > 
> > emerge -1av $(cat oldworld)
> > 
> > 
> Just a thought: Is it possible to compile a 64bit kernel and use him
> on the current system? That way you could set up your new native 64bit
> system in a chroot before overwriting the old one and thus minimize
> downtime to less than 15 minutes.

Florian,

That would be ideal!  It's exactly what I'd do -- if it's
doable.

Hopefully the experts will point to a HOWTO :->

David
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Changing CHOST

[Doug Whitesell]

On Sep 24, 2007, at 5:03 PM, David Relson wrote:
>> Just a thought: Is it possible to compile a 64bit kernel and use him
>> on the current system? That way you could set up your new native  
>> 64bit
>> system in a chroot before overwriting the old one and thus minimize
>> downtime to less than 15 minutes.
>
> Florian,
>
> That would be ideal!  It's exactly what I'd do -- if it's
> doable.
>
> Hopefully the experts will point to a HOWTO :->
>
This sounds like a way to infinite pain. (This is at first glance and  
off the top of my head without looking into it, of course...) While  
it may be possible to cross-compile a 64-bit kernel on a 32-bit  
system, IIRC unless you have the right runtime libraries compiled for  
64-bit you may have massive trouble getting the system to even come up.

But I'm not an expert on new and cool ways to try things, so your  
mileage may vary.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Changing CHOST

[Daniel Barkalow]

On Mon, 24 Sep 2007, Florian Philipp wrote:

> Just a thought: Is it possible to compile a 64bit kernel and use him on
> the current system? That way you could set up your new native 64bit
> system in a chroot before overwriting the old one and thus minimize
> downtime to less than 15 minutes.

Building a 64bit kernel with 32bit userspace should be pretty 
straightforward with crossdev (not meaningfully different from building an 
ARM kernel on an x86 host). Building a 64bit userspace while running a 
32bit userspace is a bit trickier. There's some support for building a new 
system with ROOT=/target, but not everything would build like that the 
last time I tried (building for ARM on x86).

	-Daniel
*This .sig left intentionally blank*
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Changing CHOST

[Florian Philipp]

Daniel Barkalow schrieb:
> On Mon, 24 Sep 2007, Florian Philipp wrote:
> 
>> Just a thought: Is it possible to compile a 64bit kernel and use him on
>> the current system? That way you could set up your new native 64bit
>> system in a chroot before overwriting the old one and thus minimize
>> downtime to less than 15 minutes.
> 
> Building a 64bit kernel with 32bit userspace should be pretty 
> straightforward with crossdev (not meaningfully different from building an 
> ARM kernel on an x86 host). Building a 64bit userspace while running a 
> 32bit userspace is a bit trickier. There's some support for building a new 
> system with ROOT=/target, but not everything would build like that the 
> last time I tried (building for ARM on x86).
> 
> 	-Daniel
> *This .sig left intentionally blank*

You don't need to run a 32bit userland (at least not in the way you seem
to think). All you need to do is making your 64bit kernel work with your
current 32bit userland while doing the normal gentoo installation steps
(e.g. extracting stage3 to some folder, chroot into it, updating,
emerging packages needed for your new system, ...).

If it works that way (it sounds far too easy) you could copy config
files and all that stuff from your old system to your new without
shutting down the old one until the new is ready to overwrite the old one.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-user] Why you use Gentoo

[darren kirby]

quoth the Dale:
> b.n. wrote:
> >>     All responses off list please.
> >>
> >> Please people, it's common sense to read emails before you reply to
> >> them. :-)
> >
> > It's even more common sense not to ask for off-list answers to a
> > on-list post...
> >
> > m.
>
> Plus some of us like to read them.  ;-)

Really...

I do not see a problem if folks post here as long as they understand they 
should CC the OP if they want their responses considered for whatever it is 
the OP is doing...which I might add, would be nice to know.

> Dale
>
> :-)  :-)

-d
-- 
darren kirby :: Part of the problem since 1976 :: http://badcomputer.org
"...the number of UNIX installations has grown to 10, with more expected..."
- Dennis Ritchie and Ken Thompson, June 1972
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-user] changing CHOST

[Timothy A. Holmes]

Hi folks:

In the course of learning gentoo, I managed to create several systems
using the wrong stage 3 tarballs (or something) 

They all have a CHOST setting of i386

Should I change this? What benefits will it bring me, and 

How do I do it?

As I understand it, I change the chost, and then emerge -e system &&
emerge -e world

Any input you can provide would be welcome

TIM


Timothy A. Holmes
IT Manager / Network Admin / Web Master / Computer Teacher
 
Medina Christian Academy
A Higher Standard...


-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] changing CHOST

[Bo Ørsted Andresen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 336 bytes --]

On Saturday 09 September 2006 18:54, Timothy A. Holmes wrote:
> Hi folks:
>
[SNIP]

Replying to another thread and changed the subject like this is referred to as 
hijacking a thread. Please don't do that. Instead post a new email to this 
list with the new subject. New mail rather than reply...

Thanks.

-- 
Bo Andresen

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] changing CHOST

[darren kirby]

quoth the Timothy A. Holmes:
> Hi folks:
>
> In the course of learning gentoo, I managed to create several systems
> using the wrong stage 3 tarballs (or something)
>
> They all have a CHOST setting of i386
>
> Should I change this? What benefits will it bring me, and

Depends on your type of processor. If you have a modern x86 you presumably 
want CHOST="i686-pc-linux-gnu" and you will want to change your '-march=' in 
CFLAGS to match your specific processor. This will allow gcc to take 
advantage of newer processor optimizations.

> How do I do it?

Edit /etc/make.conf. Read the comments...

> As I understand it, I change the chost, and then emerge -e system &&
> emerge -e world

I probably wouldn't bother doing a wholesale re-emerge of the system. You can 
if you want but unless you are running intensive cpu-bound processes I do not 
think the change will be overly dramatic. I would just change the settings 
and upgrade/update the individual packages when portage sees fit to do so 
through normal updates... 

> Any input you can provide would be welcome
>
> TIM

PS: please try to create a new thread rather than replying to an existing one 
with a new Q...

-d
-- 
darren kirby :: Part of the problem since 1976 :: http://badcomputer.org
"...the number of UNIX installations has grown to 10, with more expected..."
- Dennis Ritchie and Ken Thompson, June 1972
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] changing CHOST

[Richard Fish]

On 9/9/06, Timothy A. Holmes <tholmes@mcaschool.net> wrote:
> As I understand it, I change the chost, and then emerge -e system &&
> emerge -e world

Hmm, same answer I gave you yesterday:

<change CHOST in make.conf>
/usr/portage/scripts/bootstrap.sh
emerge -e system
emerge -e world

Me thinks the mail list bug has struck again.  Let me know if you
don't get this one.  ;->

-Richard
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] changing CHOST

[John J. Foster]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 370 bytes --]

On Sat, Sep 09, 2006 at 05:34:55PM -0700, Richard Fish wrote:
> 
> Me thinks the mail list bug has struck again.  Let me know if you
> don't get this one.  ;->
> 
Just an FYI - I didn't get your other mail.

festus
-- 
In all the millions of years dinosaurs roamed this planet, did any of
them feel the need to invent, say, nuclear weapons?           Mickeyz

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

RE: [gentoo-user] changing CHOST

[Timothy A. Holmes]

> -----Original Message-----
> On 9/9/06, Timothy A. Holmes <tholmes@mcaschool.net> wrote:
> > As I understand it, I change the chost, and then emerge -e system &&
> > emerge -e world
> 
> Hmm, same answer I gave you yesterday:
> 
> <change CHOST in make.conf>
> /usr/portage/scripts/bootstrap.sh
> emerge -e system
> emerge -e world
> 
> Me thinks the mail list bug has struck again.  Let me know if you
> don't get this one.  ;->
> 
> -Richard
> --
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
Richard:

I got this one - thanks, the problem is that im getting conflicting
advice from multiple sources. 

I asked again to try to clarify.

Ive received answers that range from 

You cant do that no matter what
To
You don't want to do that
To 
It wont do any good
To 
Your answer
To 
Bootstrap wont run
To 
No need for bootstrap, just change and do the emerges

Im a bit confused to be honest

Timothy A. Holmes
IT Manager / Network Admin / Web Master / Computer Teacher
 
Medina Christian Academy
A Higher Standard...


-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] changing CHOST

[Jean-Marc Beaune]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1508 bytes --]

Hi,

I had to change CHOST during gcc upgrade.
I did bootstrap.sh
I did emerge -e system
emerge -e world didn't work.

I struggled more than one week to make it work, now I'm reinstalling from
scratch.

My advise:
Backup all important data and excpect the fact that you could lost your
system.


On 9/10/06, Timothy A. Holmes <tholmes@mcaschool.net> wrote:
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > On 9/9/06, Timothy A. Holmes <tholmes@mcaschool.net> wrote:
> > > As I understand it, I change the chost, and then emerge -e system &&
> > > emerge -e world
> >
> > Hmm, same answer I gave you yesterday:
> >
> > <change CHOST in make.conf>
> > /usr/portage/scripts/bootstrap.sh
> > emerge -e system
> > emerge -e world
> >
> > Me thinks the mail list bug has struck again.  Let me know if you
> > don't get this one.  ;->
> >
> > -Richard
> > --
> > gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
> Richard:
>
> I got this one - thanks, the problem is that im getting conflicting
> advice from multiple sources.
>
> I asked again to try to clarify.
>
> Ive received answers that range from
>
> You cant do that no matter what
> To
> You don't want to do that
> To
> It wont do any good
> To
> Your answer
> To
> Bootstrap wont run
> To
> No need for bootstrap, just change and do the emerges
>
> Im a bit confused to be honest
>
> Timothy A. Holmes
> IT Manager / Network Admin / Web Master / Computer Teacher
>
> Medina Christian Academy
> A Higher Standard...
>
>
> --
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>


-- 
/JM

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2236 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] changing CHOST

[Meino Christian Cramer]

From: "Jean-Marc Beaune" <jm.beaune@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] changing CHOST
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2006 18:39:07 +0200

Hi,

 I had to change CHOST also and I can only speak of my experience --
 which may be based on the wrong way to do such things, but...

 I did:

 
 Change CHOST
 Update profile (unfortunately to the wrong one, but that's my fault)
 source /etc/profile
 emerge gcc (since I had to upgrade to gcc-4.1.1
 gcc-config
 emerge -e system
 emerge -e world

 last step was interrupted several times either do to compiling
 failures or to package, whch wants other previous installed packages
 to be recompiled with other USE-flags.

 The overall result is a running system with some packages either
 installed not with all features compiled due to other packages
 missing due to compile failures or missing completly.

 This may or may be not based on the wrong profile I choose initially.
 I will chnage to the correct profile and recompile all affected
 package and will see, how far I can get then.

 The described procedure takes me four days with interuptions. The
 computer was not switched off and did its compiling task as often as
 possible (day and night when not stopped by an compile failure or
 other incidents described above. I am running an AMD 64 X2 3800+,
 "make -j 3" and 1GB of RAM. 

 Keep hacking,
 mcc

 
 
 

> Hi,
> 
> I had to change CHOST during gcc upgrade.
> I did bootstrap.sh
> I did emerge -e system
> emerge -e world didn't work.
> 
> I struggled more than one week to make it work, now I'm reinstalling from
> scratch.
> 
> My advise:
> Backup all important data and excpect the fact that you could lost your
> system.
> 
> 
> On 9/10/06, Timothy A. Holmes <tholmes@mcaschool.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > On 9/9/06, Timothy A. Holmes <tholmes@mcaschool.net> wrote:
> > > > As I understand it, I change the chost, and then emerge -e system &&
> > > > emerge -e world
> > >
> > > Hmm, same answer I gave you yesterday:
> > >
> > > <change CHOST in make.conf>
> > > /usr/portage/scripts/bootstrap.sh
> > > emerge -e system
> > > emerge -e world
> > >
> > > Me thinks the mail list bug has struck again.  Let me know if you
> > > don't get this one.  ;->
> > >
> > > -Richard
> > > --
> > > gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
> > Richard:
> >
> > I got this one - thanks, the problem is that im getting conflicting
> > advice from multiple sources.
> >
> > I asked again to try to clarify.
> >
> > Ive received answers that range from
> >
> > You cant do that no matter what
> > To
> > You don't want to do that
> > To
> > It wont do any good
> > To
> > Your answer
> > To
> > Bootstrap wont run
> > To
> > No need for bootstrap, just change and do the emerges
> >
> > Im a bit confused to be honest
> >
> > Timothy A. Holmes
> > IT Manager / Network Admin / Web Master / Computer Teacher
> >
> > Medina Christian Academy
> > A Higher Standard...
> >
> >
> > --
> > gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
> >
> >
> 
> 
> -- 
> /JM
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

RE: [gentoo-user] changing CHOST

[Timothy A. Holmes]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3806 bytes --]




-----Original Message-----
From: richard.j.fish@gmail.com on behalf of Richard Fish
Sent: Sun 9/10/2006 2:30 PM
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] changing CHOST
 
On 9/10/06, Timothy A. Holmes <tholmes@mcaschool.net> wrote:
> Richard:
>
> I got this one - thanks, the problem is that im getting conflicting
> advice from multiple sources.

I think the problem with this is (and I don't mean to offend when I
say this...) that the people who would be able to figure out how to
successfully change CHOST on a live system have never have to do so,
because they set it right from the start.

So my advice is based on:

http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.user/169260

As well as forums threads such as:

http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-386633.html

(BTW, one has to be a bit careful on the forums, as some of those
threads have answers from people who recommend merging system and
world twice each....which is pretty much useless.)

> You cant do that no matter what

Pretty sure this isn't true.  But it would be wrong to suggest that it
is an easy thing to change, or say that there is some method that
guarantees you won't end up booting from your live CD to repair
things.

> To
> You don't want to do that

This one seems entirely up to you.  At this point in Gentoo, you
either have to change CHOST, or add ">=sys-libs/glibc-2.4" to
/etc/portage/package.mask, since 2.4 is nptl only, and that requires
better than i386.

> To
> It wont do any good

If this was the entire answer, it is simply clueless.  Using the CHOST
that matches your processor lets gcc use more effecient instructions
for newer processors.  This is what makes nptl so more efficient than
linuxthreads, because it uses processor instructions specifically
designed for multi-CPU synchronization.

Now whether the improvements are worthwhile or not is a subjective
thing, and one could argue that it isn't worth the effort.  This goes
back to the previous point.

> To
> Bootstrap wont run

Sounds like a bug.

> To
> No need for bootstrap, just change and do the emerges

Well I would have thought so too, but that hasn't worked for some
people.  Again, there is no definitive guide on changing CHOST.  The
safest option is to boot from a livecd and re-install using the new
CHOST.

But if you are willing to go that far anyway, it can't hurt to try the
bootstrap.sh ; emerge -e system ; emerge -e world sequence.
Basically, if you make it through the emerge -e system part, you have
a sane base system and anything else that breaks indicates a problem
with the change in profile or gcc versions, not the change in CHOST.

BTW, Darren's answer on this thread seems incorrect to me.  Changing
CHOST is a pretty significant thing to tweak, certainly as significant
as changing gcc versions, and you really should re-merge *everything*
to make sure your something doesn't wind up broken.

> Im a bit confused to be honest

That's ok.  It isn't an easy question to answer unfortunately.

-Richard
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list


Richard:

thanks a great deal for your answer -- it is extremely helpful.

I think i will give it a shot, the system in question right now is only my rsync mirror -- it as additional tasks planned to be installed, but that hasn't happened yet.  if i can get it to run, then it is cool, but if not, i havent lost a great deal.  I do however have a couple other production boxes that I REALLY dont want to have to rebuild that might (i havent checked yet) be built using the same stage 3 -- they are running ok, speeds and processor loads look ok, so if this breaks this box, im not going to attempt it on the other ones.

I'll let you know how it goes

TIM

[-- Attachment #2: winmail.dat --]
[-- Type: application/ms-tnef, Size: 4777 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] changing CHOST

[darren kirby]

quoth the Richard Fish:
>
> BTW, Darren's answer on this thread seems incorrect to me.  Changing
> CHOST is a pretty significant thing to tweak, certainly as significant
> as changing gcc versions, and you really should re-merge *everything*
> to make sure your something doesn't wind up broken.

Hi Richard, sorry I just noticed this (due to your help in a more recent 
thread where you linked to this). Anyway, my reasoning for my answer was that 
(although he didn't explicitly state it) Tim wanted to upgrade from i386 to 
i686 presumably. A binary built for a 386 is still able to run on a 686 
system. The cpu instructions are forward (but not backward) compatible. Thus, 
I did not think it necessary for a wholesale rebuild of the entire system on 
the spot. Indeed it seems this is not as simple as I thought. I may have been 
thinking changing CHOST was as simple as changing -march or -mcpu...

I still stand by my assertion that the speed increase will be trivial ;)

-d
-- 
darren kirby :: Part of the problem since 1976 :: http://badcomputer.org
"...the number of UNIX installations has grown to 10, with more expected..."
- Dennis Ritchie and Ken Thompson, June 1972
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] changing CHOST

[Richard Fish]

On 9/12/06, Richard Fish <bigfish@asmallpond.org> wrote:
> On 9/12/06, darren kirby <bulliver@badcomputer.org> wrote:
> > system. The cpu instructions are forward (but not backward) compatible. Thus,
> > I did not think it necessary for a wholesale rebuild of the entire system on
> > the spot. Indeed it seems this is not as simple as I thought. I may have been
> > thinking changing CHOST was as simple as changing -march or -mcpu...
>
> Well I've brought up the issue on -dev, and it seems that something
> official is in the works on this, so we'll see what comes of that.
> Maybe your answer will turn out to be correct!

And indeed, the emerge -e world may in fact be optional.

A quite from the current draft of the guide [1]:

"""
- You may want to run
# emerge -e world
now. In theory it should not be necessary to do so, but it can not be
100% guaranteed that this is actually the case. ;-)
"""

I think I'd still like to see people run an emerge -e system
regardless...just as an extra safety step to make sure the system
packages are sane.  But my understanding of what can be affected by a
change in CHOST is definitely changed.

-Richard

[1] http://dev.gentoo.org/~amne/temp/change-chost.txt
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

RE: [gentoo-user] changing CHOST

[Timothy A. Holmes]

> On 9/12/06, Richard Fish <bigfish@asmallpond.org> wrote:
> > On 9/12/06, darren kirby <bulliver@badcomputer.org> wrote:
> > > system. The cpu instructions are forward (but not backward)
> compatible. Thus,
> > > I did not think it necessary for a wholesale rebuild of the entire
> system on
> > > the spot. Indeed it seems this is not as simple as I thought. I
may
> have been
> > > thinking changing CHOST was as simple as changing -march or
-mcpu...
> >
> > Well I've brought up the issue on -dev, and it seems that something
> > official is in the works on this, so we'll see what comes of that.
> > Maybe your answer will turn out to be correct!
> 
> And indeed, the emerge -e world may in fact be optional.
> 
> A quite from the current draft of the guide [1]:
> 
> """
> - You may want to run
> # emerge -e world
> now. In theory it should not be necessary to do so, but it can not be
> 100% guaranteed that this is actually the case. ;-)
> """
> 
> I think I'd still like to see people run an emerge -e system
> regardless...just as an extra safety step to make sure the system
> packages are sane.  But my understanding of what can be affected by a
> change in CHOST is definitely changed.
> 
> -Richard
> 
> [1] http://dev.gentoo.org/~amne/temp/change-chost.txt
> --
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
[Timothy A. Holmes] 


Hi folks -- I really appreciate all the input on this -- 

It turns out - the system borked and wouldn't let me login from ssh or
console, so I dropped in a live cd and am in the process of rebuilding
it (with the proper stage)

Thanks again for all the help -- I really appreciate it and I have
learned a great deal

TIM


Timothy A. Holmes
IT Manager / Network Admin / Web Master / Computer Teacher
 
Medina Christian Academy
A Higher Standard...
 


-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] changing CHOST

[Daniel da Veiga]

On 9/13/06, Timothy A. Holmes <tholmes@mcaschool.net> wrote:
> > On 9/12/06, Richard Fish <bigfish@asmallpond.org> wrote:
> > > On 9/12/06, darren kirby <bulliver@badcomputer.org> wrote:
> > > > system. The cpu instructions are forward (but not backward)
> > compatible. Thus,
> > > > I did not think it necessary for a wholesale rebuild of the entire
> > system on
> > > > the spot. Indeed it seems this is not as simple as I thought. I
> may
> > have been
> > > > thinking changing CHOST was as simple as changing -march or
> -mcpu...
> > >
> > > Well I've brought up the issue on -dev, and it seems that something
> > > official is in the works on this, so we'll see what comes of that.
> > > Maybe your answer will turn out to be correct!
> >
> > And indeed, the emerge -e world may in fact be optional.
> >
> > A quite from the current draft of the guide [1]:
> >
> > """
> > - You may want to run
> > # emerge -e world
> > now. In theory it should not be necessary to do so, but it can not be
> > 100% guaranteed that this is actually the case. ;-)
> > """
> >
> > I think I'd still like to see people run an emerge -e system
> > regardless...just as an extra safety step to make sure the system
> > packages are sane.  But my understanding of what can be affected by a
> > change in CHOST is definitely changed.
> >
> > -Richard
> >
> > [1] http://dev.gentoo.org/~amne/temp/change-chost.txt
> > --
> > gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
> [Timothy A. Holmes]
>
>
> Hi folks -- I really appreciate all the input on this --
>
> It turns out - the system borked and wouldn't let me login from ssh or
> console, so I dropped in a live cd and am in the process of rebuilding
> it (with the proper stage)
>
> Thanks again for all the help -- I really appreciate it and I have
> learned a great deal
>

The thread is kinda dead now that the OP borked the system and is
reinstalling, but anyway, I'll report to it for future reference. Old
threads in this list and foruns talk about this with different
ways/advices, but what ended up working for me (changind from i386 to
i686) was:


some quickpkg's (gcc, glibc, python, portage, libstdc++)
(just to be sure I would NOT need a livecd)
edit make.conf
emerge gcc
(as it compiles itself with the new compiler, ended up with i686-pc-linux-gnu)
emerge glibc python portage libstdc++
(just to make sure all tools for emerge were already compiled with the
new GCC, I don't know wich order the emerge -e system uses for
packages, it upgraded my glibc, wich was the whole point of the chost
change)
emerge -e system
(just to make sure most tools were already compiled with the new chost
before any reboot/retry)
emerge -e world
(I guess recompiling stuff with the new chost will take advantage of
features present in new processors, that's the whole point of HAVING
this flag, isnt? Anyway, its more like a "bug hunting" command, also,
broken dynamic linking that could be hanging will appear, specially
libstdc++, but I kinda ask myself if it was indeed needed.)

Up and running here...

-- 
Daniel da Veiga
Computer Operator - RS - Brazil
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GCM/IT/P/O d-? s:- a? C++$ UBLA++ P+ L++ E--- W+++$ N o+ K- w O M- V-
PS PE Y PGP- t+ 5 X+++ R+* tv b+ DI+++ D+ G+ e h+ r+ y++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] changing CHOST

[Nagatoro]

Timothy A. Holmes wrote:
> Hi folks:
> 
> In the course of learning gentoo, I managed to create several systems
> using the wrong stage 3 tarballs (or something) 
> 
> They all have a CHOST setting of i386
> 
> Should I change this? What benefits will it bring me, and 

Since the new glibc - yes

> How do I do it?

http://dev.gentoo.org/~amne/temp/change-chost.txt

-- 
Naga
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list