[gentoo-user] Can't emerge mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2

[gentoo-user] Can't emerge mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2

[Jules Colding]

Hi,

"emerge --sync && emerge -vauDN" today gave me the following error.

-- 
  jules


############## Build Error #################
../../dist/bin/xpt_link _xpidlgen/cookie.xpt _xpidlgen/nsIImgManager.xpt _xpidlgen/nsIPermission.xpt _xpidlgen/nsICookieAcceptDialog.xpt _xpidlgen/nsICookiePromptService.xpt
/var/tmp/portage/mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2/work/mozilla/config/nsinstall -R -m 644 _xpidlgen/cookie.xpt ../../dist/gre/components
/var/tmp/portage/mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2/work/mozilla/config/nsinstall -R -m 644 _xpidlgen/cookie.xpt ../../dist/bin/components
+++ making chrome /var/tmp/portage/mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2/work/mozilla/extensions/cookie  => ../../dist/bin/chrome/comm.jar
+++ adding chrome ../../dist/bin/chrome/installed-chrome.txt
+++     content,install,url,jar:resource:/chrome/comm.jar!/content/cookie/
  adding: content/cookie/cookieTasksOverlay.xul (stored 0%)
  adding: content/cookie/cookieNavigatorOverlay.xul (stored 0%)
  adding: content/cookie/cookieContextOverlay.xul (stored 0%)
  adding: content/cookie/cookiePrefsOverlay.xul (stored 0%)
  adding: content/cookie/pref-cookies.xul (stored 0%)
  adding: content/cookie/pref-images.xul (stored 0%)
  adding: content/cookie/pref-popups.xul (stored 0%)
  adding: content/cookie/cookieOverlay.js (stored 0%)
  adding: content/cookie/p3p.xul (stored 0%)
  adding: content/cookie/p3pDialog.xul (stored 0%)
  adding: content/cookie/cookieAcceptDialog.xul (stored 0%)
  adding: content/cookie/cookieAcceptDialog.js (stored 0%)
+++ overriding content/cookie/contents.rdf
  adding: content/cookie/contents.rdf (stored 0%)
+++ making chrome /var/tmp/portage/mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2/work/mozilla/extensions/cookie  => ../../dist/bin/chrome/modern.jar
        zip warning: ../modern.jar not found or empty
  adding: skin/modern/communicator/cookie/taskbar-cookie.gif (stored 0%)
  adding: skin/modern/communicator/cookie/status-cookie.gif (stored 0%)
+++ making chrome /var/tmp/portage/homedir  => ../../dist/bin/chrome/classic.jar
error: file './resources/skin/classic/taskbar-cookie.gif' doesn't exist at ../../config/make-jars.pl line 418.
gmake[3]: *** [libs] Error 2
gmake[3]: Leaving directory `/var/tmp/portage/mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2/work/mozilla/extensions/cookie'
gmake[2]: *** [libs] Error 2
gmake[2]: Leaving directory `/var/tmp/portage/mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2/work/mozilla/extensions'
gmake[1]: *** [tier_94] Error 2
gmake[1]: Leaving directory `/var/tmp/portage/mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2/work/mozilla'
make: *** [default] Error 2

!!! ERROR: www-client/mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2 failed.
!!! Function src_compile, Line 159, Exitcode 2
!!! (no error message)
!!! If you need support, post the topmost build error, NOT this status message.

############## emerge --info #################
omc-2 ~ # emerge --info
Portage 2.0.51.22-r2 (default-linux/amd64/2005.0, gcc-3.4.3, glibc-2.3.5-r0, 2.6.12-gentoo-r6 x86_64)
=================================================================
System uname: 2.6.12-gentoo-r6 x86_64 AMD Opteron(tm) Processor 252
Gentoo Base System version 1.6.13
dev-lang/python:     2.3.5
sys-apps/sandbox:    1.2.11
sys-devel/autoconf:  2.13, 2.59-r6
sys-devel/automake:  1.4_p6, 1.5, 1.6.3, 1.7.9-r1, 1.8.5-r3, 1.9.5
sys-devel/binutils:  2.15.92.0.2-r10
sys-devel/libtool:   1.5.18-r1
virtual/os-headers:  2.6.11-r2
ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="amd64"
AUTOCLEAN="yes"
CBUILD="x86_64-pc-linux-gnu"
CFLAGS="-march=k8 -O2 -pipe"
CHOST="x86_64-pc-linux-gnu"
CONFIG_PROTECT="/etc /usr/kde/2/share/config /usr/kde/3/share/config /usr/lib/X11/xkb /usr/lib/mozilla/defaults/pref /usr/share/config /usr/share/texmf/dvipdfm/config/ /usr/share/texmf/dvips/config/ /usr/share/texmf/tex/generic/config/ /usr/share/texmf/tex/platex/config/ /usr/share/texmf/xdvi/ /var/qmail/control"
CONFIG_PROTECT_MASK="/etc/gconf /etc/terminfo /etc/env.d"
CXXFLAGS="-march=k8 -O2 -pipe"
DISTDIR="/usr/portage/distfiles"
FEATURES="autoconfig distlocks sandbox sfperms strict"
GENTOO_MIRRORS="http://ftp.belnet.be/mirror/rsync.gentoo.org/gentoo/ http://mirrors.sec.informatik.tu-darmstadt.de/gentoo/ http://pandemonium.tiscali.de/pub/gentoo/ ftp://ftp.snt.utwente.nl/pub/os/linux/gentoo http://mirror.gentoo.no/ http://gentoo.prz.rzeszow.pl http://ftp.du.se/pub/os/gentoo ftp://mirror.pudas.net/gentoo"
MAKEOPTS="-j1"
PKGDIR="/usr/portage/packages"
PORTAGE_TMPDIR="/var/tmp"
PORTDIR="/usr/portage"
SYNC="rsync://rsync.europe.gentoo.org/gentoo-portage"
USE="amd64 X aac aalib alsa avi berkdb bitmap-fonts bzip2 cdr crypt cups curl dvd dvdr dvdread eds emacs encode esd fam fbcon foomaticdb fortran gdbm gif gnome gpm gstreamer gtk gtk2 hal iconv imlib ipv6 jpeg libwww lzw lzw-tiff mad mozilla mp3 mpeg ncurses nls nptl nptlonly nvidia ogg opengl pam pdflib perl png python quicktime readline sdl spell ssl symlink tcltk tcpd tetex theora tiff truetype-fonts type1-fonts unicode usb userlocales vorbis xine xml2 xmms xpm xv xvid zlib userland_GNU kernel_linux elibc_glibc"
Unset:  ASFLAGS, CTARGET, LANG, LC_ALL, LDFLAGS, LINGUAS, PORTDIR_OVERLAY



-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Can't emerge mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2

[Patrick Börjesson]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 421 bytes --]

On 05/07/23 13:38, Jules Colding wrote:
> "emerge --sync && emerge -vauDN" today gave me the following error.
[snip]
 
I'd think that the developers would rather have that information posted
to http://bugs.gentoo.org/ instead...

-- 
Regards,
  Patrick Börjesson

PGP signature: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x21792A5D
PGP fingerprint: 74AF D4EF 6BDE CF77 16BE  6A29 CDB8 7607 2179 2A5D

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

Re: [gentoo-user] Can't emerge mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2

[Holly Bostick]

Jules Colding schreef:
> Hi,
> 
> "emerge --sync && emerge -vauDN" today gave me the following error.
> 

>   adding: skin/modern/communicator/cookie/taskbar-cookie.gif (stored 0%)
>   adding: skin/modern/communicator/cookie/status-cookie.gif (stored 0%)
> +++ making chrome /var/tmp/portage/homedir  => ../../dist/bin/chrome/classic.jar
> error: file './resources/skin/classic/taskbar-cookie.gif' doesn't exist at ../../config/make-jars.pl line 418.
> gmake[3]: *** [libs] Error 2
> gmake[3]: Leaving directory `/var/tmp/portage/mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2/work/mozilla/extensions/cookie'
> gmake[2]: *** [libs] Error 2
> gmake[2]: Leaving directory `/var/tmp/portage/mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2/work/mozilla/extensions'
> gmake[1]: *** [tier_94] Error 2
> gmake[1]: Leaving directory `/var/tmp/portage/mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2/work/mozilla'
> make: *** [default] Error 2
> 
> !!! ERROR: www-client/mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2 failed.
> !!! Function src_compile, Line 159, Exitcode 2
> !!! (no error message)
> !!! If you need support, post the topmost build error, NOT this status message.
> 
> ############## emerge --info #################
> omc-2 ~ # emerge --info
> Portage 2.0.51.22-r2 (default-linux/amd64/2005.0, gcc-3.4.3, glibc-2.3.5-r0, 2.6.12-gentoo-r6 x86_64)
> =================================================================
> System uname: 2.6.12-gentoo-r6 x86_64 AMD Opteron(tm) Processor 252
> Gentoo Base System version 1.6.13
> dev-lang/python:     2.3.5
> sys-apps/sandbox:    1.2.11
> sys-devel/autoconf:  2.13, 2.59-r6
> sys-devel/automake:  1.4_p6, 1.5, 1.6.3, 1.7.9-r1, 1.8.5-r3, 1.9.5
> sys-devel/binutils:  2.15.92.0.2-r10
> sys-devel/libtool:   1.5.18-r1
> virtual/os-headers:  2.6.11-r2
> ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="amd64"
> AUTOCLEAN="yes"
> CBUILD="x86_64-pc-linux-gnu"
> CFLAGS="-march=k8 -O2 -pipe"
> CHOST="x86_64-pc-linux-gnu"
> CONFIG_PROTECT="/etc /usr/kde/2/share/config /usr/kde/3/share/config /usr/lib/X11/xkb /usr/lib/mozilla/defaults/pref /usr/share/config /usr/share/texmf/dvipdfm/config/ /usr/share/texmf/dvips/config/ /usr/share/texmf/tex/generic/config/ /usr/share/texmf/tex/platex/config/ /usr/share/texmf/xdvi/ /var/qmail/control"
> CONFIG_PROTECT_MASK="/etc/gconf /etc/terminfo /etc/env.d"
> CXXFLAGS="-march=k8 -O2 -pipe"

Well, since I just (literally, 10 minutes ago) emerged
mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2, and had no problems on a 32-bit system, I must
suspect that this is a 64-bit issue.

In that regard, I see at least one thing in your emerge info that has
been called into question for 64-bit users in recent threads:

CFLAGS="-march=k8

I am, of course, not a 64-bit user, so I don't know anything about this,
but I have seen several responses to similar questions that suggest that
the correct flag is

march=amd64

Oh, and despite what Patrick said, I think you were right to post here
first-- no need to clog up b.g.o with what might be a configuration
problem and waste developer's time closing an invalid bug.

I think it's always wise to try to make sure that it really is a bug
before posting it.

And it seems to me that if there is a bug, it might be a *documentation*
bug (because the other person who mentioned using march=k8 said that
that was the recommendation of the docs, but that seems to no longer be
the case, if people using this flag are regularly receiving compilation
errors).

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

Re: [gentoo-user] Can't emerge mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2

[Jules Colding]

On Sat, 2005-07-23 at 14:50 +0200, Holly Bostick wrote:
> Well, since I just (literally, 10 minutes ago) emerged
> mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2, and had no problems on a 32-bit system, I must
> suspect that this is a 64-bit issue.
> 
> In that regard, I see at least one thing in your emerge info that has
> been called into question for 64-bit users in recent threads:
> 
> CFLAGS="-march=k8
> 
> I am, of course, not a 64-bit user, so I don't know anything about this,
> but I have seen several responses to similar questions that suggest that
> the correct flag is
> 
> march=amd64

Do you remember where you've seen this? I have searched devel, user and
amd64 without finding any relevant posting. I choose "march=k8" due to
the recommendation of the handbook.

Thanks,
  jules


-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Can't emerge mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2

[Patrick Börjesson]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2512 bytes --]

On 05/07/23 14:50, Holly Bostick wrote:
> Jules Colding schreef:
> > "emerge --sync && emerge -vauDN" today gave me the following error.
> > 
[snip]
> 
> Well, since I just (literally, 10 minutes ago) emerged
> mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2, and had no problems on a 32-bit system, I must
> suspect that this is a 64-bit issue.
> 
> In that regard, I see at least one thing in your emerge info that has
> been called into question for 64-bit users in recent threads:
> 
> CFLAGS="-march=k8
> 
> I am, of course, not a 64-bit user, so I don't know anything about this,
> but I have seen several responses to similar questions that suggest that
> the correct flag is
> 
> march=amd64

Looking at gcc's info page, there is no amd64 target. The only ones I
can find that seems reasonable are k8 and athlon64. I use k8 myself and
haven't had _any_ problems with it. 

> Oh, and despite what Patrick said, I think you were right to post here
> first-- no need to clog up b.g.o with what might be a configuration
> problem and waste developer's time closing an invalid bug.

I really don't see how this could be a configuration problem, since it
would have complained about an erroneous compilation flag if it was the
k8 thing that was at fault... And missing files (which the compilation
error points at) sounds pretty much like a valid bug to me...

> I think it's always wise to try to make sure that it really is a bug
> before posting it.

Of course, but looking at the ordinary response from developers to these
kind of emails, I'd guess that b.g.o is where they want the report, not
here...

> And it seems to me that if there is a bug, it might be a *documentation*
> bug (because the other person who mentioned using march=k8 said that
> that was the recommendation of the docs, but that seems to no longer be
> the case, if people using this flag are regularly receiving compilation
> errors).

Documentation bug? Not recommended by the docs any more? 
You might want to actually try to find information about the subjects
you respond to. 

Straight out of the AMD64 Gentoo Handbook:
"AMD64 users who want to use a native 64 bit system should use
-march=k8"
Combining that cite with the information from the gcc info page, I'm
pretty sure it's not a "documentation bug". 

-- 
Regards,
  Patrick Börjesson

PGP signature: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x21792A5D
PGP fingerprint: 74AF D4EF 6BDE CF77 16BE  6A29 CDB8 7607 2179 2A5D

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

Re: [gentoo-user] Can't emerge mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2

[Richard Fish]

Patrick Börjesson wrote:

>>Oh, and despite what Patrick said, I think you were right to post here
>>first-- no need to clog up b.g.o with what might be a configuration
>>problem and waste developer's time closing an invalid bug.
>>    
>>
>
>I really don't see how this could be a configuration problem, since it
>would have complained about an erroneous compilation flag if it was the
>k8 thing that was at fault... And missing files (which the compilation
>error points at) sounds pretty much like a valid bug to me...
>
>  
>

Errors building packages are *frequently* configuration problems.  
Anybody who has followed this list for at least a month knows that.

Thus, this is a perfectly valid forum to get feedback on an issue before 
filing a new bug report on b.g.o.  Bug reports that are not really bugs 
just waste valuable developer time.

That said, I do agree that this looks like an AMD64 specific bug.


>>I think it's always wise to try to make sure that it really is a bug
>>before posting it.
>>    
>>
>
>Of course, but looking at the ordinary response from developers to these
>kind of emails, I'd guess that b.g.o is where they want the report, not
>here...
>  
>

"Here" being gentoo-user, there are not a lot of developer responses 
here.  On gentoo-dev, you are correct, the standard response is "file on 
b.g.o."  But I still maintain that it is better to ask here (or on the 
forums, or on #gentoo) first.

>>And it seems to me that if there is a bug, it might be a *documentation*
>>bug (because the other person who mentioned using march=k8 said that
>>that was the recommendation of the docs, but that seems to no longer be
>>the case, if people using this flag are regularly receiving compilation
>>errors).
>>    
>>
>
>Documentation bug? Not recommended by the docs any more? 
>You might want to actually try to find information about the subjects
>you respond to. 
>
>Straight out of the AMD64 Gentoo Handbook:
>"AMD64 users who want to use a native 64 bit system should use
>-march=k8"
>Combining that cite with the information from the gcc info page, I'm
>pretty sure it's not a "documentation bug". 
>
>  
>

Hold on...the -march thing would be an easy mistake to make for those of 
us who don't run AMD processors, and are just trying to help.  Afterall, 
the platform keyword  is "amd64".  And gcc info says that k8, opteron, 
athlon64, and athlon-fx are all equivalent, although I would suggest 
that the non-k8 options are more descriptive.

-Richard

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Can't emerge mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2

[Patrick Börjesson]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4035 bytes --]

On 05/07/23 18:37, Richard Fish wrote:
> Patrick Börjesson wrote:
> 
> >>Oh, and despite what Patrick said, I think you were right to post here
> >>first-- no need to clog up b.g.o with what might be a configuration
> >>problem and waste developer's time closing an invalid bug.
> >>   
> >
> >I really don't see how this could be a configuration problem, since it
> >would have complained about an erroneous compilation flag if it was the
> >k8 thing that was at fault... And missing files (which the compilation
> >error points at) sounds pretty much like a valid bug to me...
> >
> 
> Errors building packages are *frequently* configuration problems.  
> Anybody who has followed this list for at least a month knows that.
> 
> Thus, this is a perfectly valid forum to get feedback on an issue before 
> filing a new bug report on b.g.o.  Bug reports that are not really bugs 
> just waste valuable developer time.
> 
> That said, I do agree that this looks like an AMD64 specific bug.

When did I say that it wasn't frequent with configuration problems
leading to failed builds? I was (and anyone really reading my reply
would realize it) pointing to this specific failed build. 

And I'm just curious; how would a configuration error (that the user has
made) lead to a graphics file missing during the build? (not counting in
those "configurations" where you're yourself editing the ebuild or
otherwise fucking with depends and build options suggested by the ebuild
maintainer)

> >>I think it's always wise to try to make sure that it really is a bug
> >>before posting it.
> >>   
> >
> >Of course, but looking at the ordinary response from developers to these
> >kind of emails, I'd guess that b.g.o is where they want the report, not
> >here...
> > 
> 
> "Here" being gentoo-user, there are not a lot of developer responses 
> here.  On gentoo-dev, you are correct, the standard response is "file on 
> b.g.o."  But I still maintain that it is better to ask here (or on the 
> forums, or on #gentoo) first.
> 
> >>And it seems to me that if there is a bug, it might be a *documentation*
> >>bug (because the other person who mentioned using march=k8 said that
> >>that was the recommendation of the docs, but that seems to no longer be
> >>the case, if people using this flag are regularly receiving compilation
> >>errors).
> >>   
> >
> >Documentation bug? Not recommended by the docs any more? 
> >You might want to actually try to find information about the subjects
> >you respond to. 
> >
> >Straight out of the AMD64 Gentoo Handbook:
> >"AMD64 users who want to use a native 64 bit system should use
> >-march=k8"
> >Combining that cite with the information from the gcc info page, I'm
> >pretty sure it's not a "documentation bug". 
> >
> > 
> >
> 
> Hold on...the -march thing would be an easy mistake to make for those of 
> us who don't run AMD processors, and are just trying to help.  Afterall, 
> the platform keyword  is "amd64".  And gcc info says that k8, opteron, 
> athlon64, and athlon-fx are all equivalent, although I would suggest 
> that the non-k8 options are more descriptive.

Of course, but in this case it wasn't an oversight... The poster
explicitly said that using march=k8 seemed to no longer be the
recommendation of the docs. That implies at least _some_ looking into
the subject before posting... 

Since I'm myself using the specified platform and have had at least a
bit experience with it before reading the post, I was mostly irritated
of the reply since it was obvious that the poster didn't know what she
was talking about (regarding the march thing...)

Also, since the originator had posted the "emerge info" output, I
assumed that he/she was at least a bit familiar with how bug handling is
handled by Gentoo.

-- 
Regards,
  Patrick Börjesson

PGP signature: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x21792A5D
PGP fingerprint: 74AF D4EF 6BDE CF77 16BE  6A29 CDB8 7607 2179 2A5D

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

Re: [gentoo-user] Can't emerge mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2

[Richard Fish]

Patrick Börjesson wrote:
>  When did I say that it wasn't frequent with configuration problems
>  leading to failed builds? I was (and anyone really reading my reply
>  would realize it) pointing to this specific failed build.
>
>  And I'm just curious; how would a configuration error (that the user
>  has made) lead to a graphics file missing during the build? (not
>  counting in those "configurations" where you're yourself editing the
>  ebuild or otherwise fucking with depends and build options suggested
>  by the ebuild maintainer)

I already said I agree with you, that in this specific case it seems to 
be a bug appropriate for reporting to b.g.o.

But looking at your original response, you said:

>  I'd think that the developers would rather have that information
>  posted to http://bugs.gentoo.org/ instead...

To me, Holly, and I'd bet many others, the "instead..." in that line 
could only be read as telling the OP that he has posted to the wrong 
place, and that we do not welcome such things here.

Plus, the OP message was very much of the "here is the output of a 
failed build, what does it mean" variety.  Many such posts come from 
people who don't know how to recognize the actual source of the build 
failure.  Whether it says "missing file", "unresolved symbol", "locking 
failed", or "compiler bug", they simply do not know what it *really* 
means (and sometimes, not even what line contains the real problem).

Now, I don't mean to offend any users here.  I don't expect everybody 
running Gentoo to be a programmer or linux expert.  So I will say it 
clearly:  if a user encounters an error in emerge that he doesn't know 
what to do with, it is entirely appropriate to post here first.

>  Of course, but in this case it wasn't an oversight... The poster
>  explicitly said that using march=k8 seemed to no longer be the
>  recommendation of the docs. That implies at least _some_ looking into
>  the subject before posting...

No, Holly said that her advice was based on "recent threads".  A recent 
thread on this list involving gzip on by an amd64 user suggested trying 
different march options.  Now, it was _bad_ advice (sorry Holly, but it 
was!), but Holly did say she doesn't use amd64 and wasn't sure.

>  Since I'm myself using the specified platform and have had at least a
>  bit experience with it

Good. Please help educate those of us who don't have or know the amd64 
platform very well! :-)

>  Also, since the originator had posted the "emerge info" output, I
>  assumed that he/she was at least a bit familiar with how bug handling
>  is handled by Gentoo.

Maybe, but I still think it was pretty clear that the OP was not sure 
whether the problem was an actual bug or not.

-Richard

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Can't emerge mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2

[Patrick Börjesson]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3787 bytes --]

On 05/07/23 20:19, Richard Fish wrote:
> Patrick Börjesson wrote:
> > I'd think that the developers would rather have that information
> > posted to http://bugs.gentoo.org/ instead...
> 
> To me, Holly, and I'd bet many others, the "instead..." in that line 
> could only be read as telling the OP that he has posted to the wrong 
> place, and that we do not welcome such things here.

Ok, reading my original post again I can see your point ;)

> Plus, the OP message was very much of the "here is the output of a 
> failed build, what does it mean" variety.  Many such posts come from 
> people who don't know how to recognize the actual source of the build 
> failure.  Whether it says "missing file", "unresolved symbol", "locking 
> failed", or "compiler bug", they simply do not know what it *really* 
> means (and sometimes, not even what line contains the real problem).

Ok, I might have read a bit too much into the fact that he posted the
output of "emerge info". Not very usual in this list (from what I've
seen in the last couple of years) since most people who don't know what
line in the build failure is relevant mostly don't give much information
either concerning arch and other information that might be important to
help finding the cause. 
Although... I would suggest that the OP give a more explicit "question",
since I was really not sure if it was a "anyone seen this before?", "I'm
a n00b, please solve this for me!" or a "where should I take this to get
it solved?" question. 

> Now, I don't mean to offend any users here.  I don't expect everybody 
> running Gentoo to be a programmer or linux expert.  So I will say it 
> clearly:  if a user encounters an error in emerge that he doesn't know 
> what to do with, it is entirely appropriate to post here first.

Agreed

> > Of course, but in this case it wasn't an oversight... The poster
> > explicitly said that using march=k8 seemed to no longer be the
> > recommendation of the docs. That implies at least _some_ looking into
> > the subject before posting...
> 
> No, Holly said that her advice was based on "recent threads".  A recent 
> thread on this list involving gzip on by an amd64 user suggested trying 
> different march options.  Now, it was _bad_ advice (sorry Holly, but it 
> was!), but Holly did say she doesn't use amd64 and wasn't sure.

Ok. I just make it a point of trying to find a bit more information, than
just previous threads in a user mailinglist, about the things I suggest.
But I'll try being more forgiving towards those who might not next time ;)

> > Since I'm myself using the specified platform and have had at least a
> > bit experience with it
> 
> Good. Please help educate those of us who don't have or know the amd64 
> platform very well! :-)

Ehm... now let's not take this overboard ;) I'm by no means an expert
(or even near experienced) on this arch. I'm just saying I might have at
least some information that might be more relevant than a 32 bit only
person might have...

> > Also, since the originator had posted the "emerge info" output, I
> > assumed that he/she was at least a bit familiar with how bug handling
> > is handled by Gentoo.
> 
> Maybe, but I still think it was pretty clear that the OP was not sure 
> whether the problem was an actual bug or not.

Maybe, but I'm still inclined to give short (and sometimes
uninformative) answers to questions that doesn't really give enough
information regarding both the experience level of the person, and
especially what he/she wants help with.

-- 
Regards,
  Patrick Börjesson

PGP signature: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x21792A5D
PGP fingerprint: 74AF D4EF 6BDE CF77 16BE  6A29 CDB8 7607 2179 2A5D

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

Re: [gentoo-user] Can't emerge mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2

[Jules Colding]

On Sun, 2005-07-24 at 01:02 +0200, Patrick Börjesson wrote:
> Although... I would suggest that the OP give a more explicit "question",
> since I was really not sure if it was a "anyone seen this before?", "I'm
> a n00b, please solve this for me!" or a "where should I take this to get
> it solved?" question. 

Being the OP it was a question in the line of 

"Here might be a potential problem in the build but I don't know if it
is the source, my system, the ebuild or if I'm an idiot. Has anyone seen
this too?" 

Sorry if I was to vague. I'll be more specific the next time :-) 


Best regards,
  jules


-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Can't emerge mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2

[Holly Bostick]

Patrick Börjesson schreef:
> On 05/07/23 18:37, Richard Fish wrote:
> 
>>>>And it seems to me that if there is a bug, it might be a *documentation*
>>>>bug (because the other person who mentioned using march=k8 said that
>>>>that was the recommendation of the docs, but that seems to no longer be
>>>>the case, if people using this flag are regularly receiving compilation
>>>>errors).
>>>>  
>>>
>>>Documentation bug? Not recommended by the docs any more? 
>>>You might want to actually try to find information about the subjects
>>>you respond to. 
>>>
>>>Straight out of the AMD64 Gentoo Handbook:
>>>"AMD64 users who want to use a native 64 bit system should use
>>>-march=k8"
>>>Combining that cite with the information from the gcc info page, I'm
>>>pretty sure it's not a "documentation bug". 
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Hold on...the -march thing would be an easy mistake to make for those of 
>>us who don't run AMD processors, and are just trying to help.  Afterall, 
>>the platform keyword  is "amd64".  And gcc info says that k8, opteron, 
>>athlon64, and athlon-fx are all equivalent, although I would suggest 
>>that the non-k8 options are more descriptive.
> 
> 
> Of course, but in this case it wasn't an oversight... The poster
> explicitly said that using march=k8 seemed to no longer be the
> recommendation of the docs. That implies at least _some_ looking into
> the subject before posting... 
> 

If the poster being referred to is me, that wasn't what I meant to say,
or rather what I meant to be *understood*-- what I meant was that
apparently the Handbook recommends using the k8 flag, but people using
that flag seem (and I stress "seem", as I don't follow this issue that
closely, naturally) to be running into problems, whereas those using the
amd64 flag are not (or at least not the same problems).

Now, I don't know the truth of the matter, but that would lead me to
suspect that there could be *outdated information in the Gentoo
documentation* (thus, a "documentation bug"), which, if those affected
can verify, should perhaps be submitted.

Sorry for the confusion.

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

Re: [gentoo-user] Can't emerge mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2

[neil]

Holly Bostick wrote:

> Well, since I just (literally, 10 minutes ago) emerged
> mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2, and had no problems on a 32-bit system, I must
> suspect that this is a 64-bit issue.

Nope. I emerged both firefox and thunderbird without issue on my AMD64 
4000+ about 14 hours ago.

> In that regard, I see at least one thing in your emerge info that has
> been called into question for 64-bit users in recent threads:
> 
> CFLAGS="-march=k8

I use k8. k8, opteron, etc., etc. are supposed to be synonyms as I 
understand it. k8 is the preferred one according to most sources I have 
read but, if they are truly synonyms, I'm not sure why one should be 
preferred over another.

> Oh, and despite what Patrick said, I think you were right to post here
> first-- no need to clog up b.g.o with what might be a configuration
> problem and waste developer's time closing an invalid bug.
> 
> I think it's always wise to try to make sure that it really is a bug
> before posting it.

Quite right. I doubt that it is a bug - more likely a broken system in 
some way.

> the other person who mentioned using march=k8 said that
> that was the recommendation of the docs, but that seems to no longer be
> the case, if people using this flag are regularly receiving compilation
> errors

No errors here. :)


Be lucky,

Neil


-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Can't emerge mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 567 bytes --]

On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 19:38:06 +0100, neil wrote:

> > CFLAGS="-march=k8
> 
> I use k8. k8, opteron, etc., etc. are supposed to be synonyms as I 
> understand it. k8 is the preferred one according to most sources I have 
> read but, if they are truly synonyms, I'm not sure why one should be 
> preferred over another.

Because they may not always be synonyms? In that case, choosing the most
generic of the currently synonymous options is least likely to cause
breakage later.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

I thought the 10 commandments were multiple choice.

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

Re: [gentoo-user] Can't emerge mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2

[Bob Sanders]

On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 13:38:38 +0200
Jules Colding <colding@omesc.com> wrote:

> 
> "emerge --sync && emerge -vauDN" today gave me the following error.
> 

I had no problem, on my amd64 system, emergeing firefox this morning -

[ I] www-client/mozilla-firefox (1.0.6-r2):  Firefox Web Browser

Here is my emerge info -

Portage 2.0.51.22-r2 (default-linux/amd64/2004.3, gcc-3.4.3, glibc-2.3.5-r0, 2.6.12-gentoo-r4 x86_64)
=================================================================
System uname: 2.6.12-gentoo-r4 x86_64 AMD Athlon(tm) 64 Processor 3000+
Gentoo Base System version 1.6.13
ccache version 2.3 [disabled]
dev-lang/python:     2.3.5
sys-apps/sandbox:    1.2.11
sys-devel/autoconf:  2.13, 2.59-r6
sys-devel/automake:  1.4_p6, 1.5, 1.6.3, 1.7.9-r1, 1.8.5-r3, 1.9.5
sys-devel/binutils:  2.15.92.0.2-r10
sys-devel/libtool:   1.5.18-r1
virtual/os-headers:  2.6.11-r2
ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="amd64"
AUTOCLEAN="yes"
CBUILD="x86_64-pc-linux-gnu"
CFLAGS="-O2 -pipe"
CHOST="x86_64-pc-linux-gnu"
CONFIG_PROTECT="/etc /usr/kde/2/share/config /usr/kde/3.3/env /usr/kde/3.3/share/config /usr/kde/3.3/shutdown /usr/kde/3.4/env /usr/kde/3.4/share/config /usr/kde/3.4/shutdown /usr/kde/3/share/config /usr/lib/X11/xkb /usr/share/config /var/qmail/control"
CONFIG_PROTECT_MASK="/etc/gconf /etc/terminfo /etc/env.d"
CXXFLAGS="-O2 -pipe"
DISTDIR="/usr/portage/distfiles"
FEATURES="autoconfig candy distlocks sandbox sfperms strict"
GENTOO_MIRRORS="http://distfiles.gentoo.org http://distro.ibiblio.org/pub/Linux/distributions/gentoo"
MAKEOPTS="-j2"
PKGDIR="/usr/portage/packages"
PORTAGE_TMPDIR="/var/tmp"
PORTDIR="/usr/portage"
SYNC="rsync://rsync.gentoo.org/gentoo-portage"
USE="amd64 3dnowex X a52 aac accessibility acpi alsa audiofile avi bitmap-fonts bmp bzip2 bzlib cap cdinstall cdparanoia cdr cdrom codecs cpudetection crypt css cups curl curlwrappers dga dillo dv dvd dvdr dvdread emul-linux encode escreen esd exif fame ffmpeg fftw flac flash fluidsynth foomaticdb freetype gd gdbm gif gimp gimpprint gkrellm glut gmp gpm gs gtk gtk2 ieee1394 image imlib imlib2 ithreads jack-tmpfs jpeg jpeg2k ladcca lcms libcaca lirc lm_sensors lzo lzw mad mbox mime ming mixer mjpeg mng mp3 mpeg mpeg2 mpeg4 mplayer multilib mythtv nls nptl nvidia offensive ogg oggvorbis openal opengl oss pcre pdf pdfkit pdflib perl php png portaudio posix ppds python quicktime rar real rtc ruby sdk slang sndfile spell ssl svg tcltk theora tiff transcode usb uudeview v4l2 vcd vcdimager vhosts vorbis wmf xanim xfs xine xml xml2 xmms xosd xpm xscreensaver xv xvid xvmc yv12 zlib zvbi userland_GNU kernel_linux elibc_glibc"
Unset:  ASFLAGS, CTARGET, LANG, LC_ALL, LDFLAGS, LINGUAS, PORTDIR_OVERLAY

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

Re: [gentoo-user] Can't emerge mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2

[Zac Medico]

Jules Colding wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> "emerge --sync && emerge -vauDN" today gave me the following error.
> 
[snip]
>   adding: content/cookie/contents.rdf (stored 0%)
> +++ making chrome /var/tmp/portage/mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2/work/mozilla/extensions/cookie  => ../../dist/bin/chrome/modern.jar
>         zip warning: ../modern.jar not found or empty
>   adding: skin/modern/communicator/cookie/taskbar-cookie.gif (stored 0%)
>   adding: skin/modern/communicator/cookie/status-cookie.gif (stored 0%)
> +++ making chrome /var/tmp/portage/homedir  => ../../dist/bin/chrome/classic.jar
> error: file './resources/skin/classic/taskbar-cookie.gif' doesn't exist at ../../config/make-jars.pl line 418.

This seems like a continuation of the previous build problems that you have had with firefox (where we were discussing MAKEOPTS).  Assuming that others cannot reproduce this (sorry, I don't have my amd64 right now), there's still something wrong with your build system somewhere.  This could be a shot in the dark, but I think that you should remerge your autoconf and automake packages to see if that affects this.

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

Re: [gentoo-user] Can't emerge mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2

[Richard Fish]

Zac Medico wrote:

> Jules Colding wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> "emerge --sync && emerge -vauDN" today gave me the following error.
>>
> [snip]
>
>>   adding: content/cookie/contents.rdf (stored 0%)
>> +++ making chrome 
>> /var/tmp/portage/mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2/work/mozilla/extensions/cookie  
>> => ../../dist/bin/chrome/modern.jar
>>         zip warning: ../modern.jar not found or empty
>>   adding: skin/modern/communicator/cookie/taskbar-cookie.gif (stored 0%)
>>   adding: skin/modern/communicator/cookie/status-cookie.gif (stored 0%)
>> +++ making chrome /var/tmp/portage/homedir  => 
>> ../../dist/bin/chrome/classic.jar
>> error: file './resources/skin/classic/taskbar-cookie.gif' doesn't 
>> exist at ../../config/make-jars.pl line 418.
>
>
> This seems like a continuation of the previous build problems that you 
> have had with firefox (where we were discussing MAKEOPTS).  Assuming 
> that others cannot reproduce this (sorry, I don't have my amd64 right 
> now), there's still something wrong with your build system somewhere.  
> This could be a shot in the dark, but I think that you should remerge 
> your autoconf and automake packages to see if that affects this.
>
> Zac


Hmm, since others with similar systems cannot duplicate the problem, I 
decided to capture all of the build output on my system (P4) and 
compare.  Jules, there is definitely something not right on your system, 
but I don't know what yet.  You get the following:

+++ overriding content/cookie/contents.rdf
  adding: content/cookie/contents.rdf (stored 0%)
+++ making chrome /var/tmp/portage/mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2/work/mozilla/extensions/cookie  => ../../dist/bin/chrome/modern.jar
        zip warning: ../modern.jar not found or empty
  adding: skin/modern/communicator/cookie/taskbar-cookie.gif (stored 0%)
  adding: skin/modern/communicator/cookie/status-cookie.gif (stored 0%)
+++ making chrome /var/tmp/portage/homedir  => ../../dist/bin/chrome/classic.jar
error: file './resources/skin/classic/taskbar-cookie.gif' doesn't exist at ../../config/make-jars.pl line 418.

The "/var/tmp/portage/homedir" is wrong.  On my system, I get:

+++ overriding content/cookie/contents.rdf
  adding: content/cookie/contents.rdf (stored 0%)
+++ making chrome /var/tmp/portage/mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2/work/mozilla/extensions/cookie  => ../../dist/bin/chrome/modern.jar
        zip warning: ../modern.jar not found or empty
  adding: skin/modern/communicator/cookie/taskbar-cookie.gif (stored 0%)
  adding: skin/modern/communicator/cookie/status-cookie.gif (stored 0%)
+++ making chrome /var/tmp/portage/mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2/work/mozilla/extensions/cookie  => ../../dist/bin/chrome/classic.jar

Using the wrong version of autoconf/automake is the only thing I can think of that would cause this kind of thing.

What do you get if you do:

# which autoconf
# autoconf --version

-Richard


-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Can't emerge mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2

[Jules Colding]

On Sat, 2005-07-23 at 23:26 +0200, Richard Fish wrote:
> Hmm, since others with similar systems cannot duplicate the problem, I 
> decided to capture all of the build output on my system (P4) and 
> compare.  Jules, there is definitely something not right on your system, 
> but I don't know what yet.  You get the following:
> 
> +++ overriding content/cookie/contents.rdf
>   adding: content/cookie/contents.rdf (stored 0%)
> +++ making chrome /var/tmp/portage/mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2/work/mozilla/extensions/cookie  => ../../dist/bin/chrome/modern.jar
>         zip warning: ../modern.jar not found or empty
>   adding: skin/modern/communicator/cookie/taskbar-cookie.gif (stored 0%)
>   adding: skin/modern/communicator/cookie/status-cookie.gif (stored 0%)
> +++ making chrome /var/tmp/portage/homedir  => ../../dist/bin/chrome/classic.jar
> error: file './resources/skin/classic/taskbar-cookie.gif' doesn't exist at ../../config/make-jars.pl line 418.
> 
> The "/var/tmp/portage/homedir" is wrong.  

Sharp eyes. I didn't notice that one.

> On my system, I get:
> 
> +++ overriding content/cookie/contents.rdf
>   adding: content/cookie/contents.rdf (stored 0%)
> +++ making chrome /var/tmp/portage/mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2/work/mozilla/extensions/cookie  => ../../dist/bin/chrome/modern.jar
>         zip warning: ../modern.jar not found or empty
>   adding: skin/modern/communicator/cookie/taskbar-cookie.gif (stored 0%)
>   adding: skin/modern/communicator/cookie/status-cookie.gif (stored 0%)
> +++ making chrome /var/tmp/portage/mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2/work/mozilla/extensions/cookie  => ../../dist/bin/chrome/classic.jar
> 
> Using the wrong version of autoconf/automake is the only thing I can think of that would cause this kind of thing.
> 
> What do you get if you do:
> 
> # which autoconf
omc-2 ~ # which autoconf
/usr/bin/autoconf

> # autoconf --version
omc-2 ~ # autoconf --version
autoconf (GNU Autoconf) 2.59
Written by David J. MacKenzie and Akim Demaille.


I am trying to reemerge autoconf and automake as zac advised. BTW, the
"homedir" above is now empty, but is does still exists. It has other
permissions that the other directories. Like:

########### snip ##########
drwxr-xr-x  3 portage portage  72 Jul 21 03:05 grep-2.5.1-r6
drwxr-xr-x  3 portage portage  72 Jul 21 02:10 gzip-1.3.5-r5
drwxrws---  4 portage portage 120 Jul 22 20:58 homedir
drwxr-xr-x  3 portage portage  72 Jul 19 21:41 linux-headers-2.6.8.1-r4
########### snip ##########

Don't know if that is significant, but is sure does look suspicious...

Best regards,
  jules



-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Can't emerge mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2

[Jules Colding]

On Sat, 2005-07-23 at 11:51 -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
> This seems like a continuation of the previous build problems that you
> have had with firefox (where we were discussing MAKEOPTS).  Assuming
> that others cannot reproduce this (sorry, I don't have my amd64 right
> now), there's still something wrong with your build system somewhere.
> This could be a shot in the dark, but I think that you should remerge
> your autoconf and automake packages to see if that affects this.

Hmm... Among my USE flags is "nptlonly". Might that be a problem?

-- 
  jules


-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Can't emerge mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2

[Richard Fish]

Jules Colding wrote:

> On Sat, 2005-07-23 at 11:51 -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
>
>> This seems like a continuation of the previous build problems that you
>> have had with firefox (where we were discussing MAKEOPTS). Assuming
>> that others cannot reproduce this (sorry, I don't have my amd64 right
>> now), there's still something wrong with your build system somewhere.
>> This could be a shot in the dark, but I think that you should remerge
>> your autoconf and automake packages to see if that affects this.
>
>
> Hmm... Among my USE flags is "nptlonly". Might that be a problem?
>

Well, nptlonly seems to work for a lot of people, so I don't think that 
should be a problem.  I've only ever heard of it affecting old 
binary-only software.

The only change I would be tempted to make to your USE flags would be to 
add multilib, which would give you the ability to build/run both 32 and 
64-bit applications.  I don't see how this could fix your current 
problems...but I did notice that Bob Sanders (one of the two WFM reports 
on this thread) has this in his USE flags.  Of course he also doesn't 
have nptlonly, or userlocales, so who knows...

-Richard


-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Can't emerge mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2

[Jules Colding]

On Sun, 2005-07-24 at 15:20 +0200, Richard Fish wrote:
> Jules Colding wrote:
> > Hmm... Among my USE flags is "nptlonly". Might that be a problem?
> >
> 
> Well, nptlonly seems to work for a lot of people, so I don't think that 
> should be a problem.  I've only ever heard of it affecting old 
> binary-only software.

I am seeing random crashes of Evolution. The backtrace originates, as
far I know, always in libpthread, so maybe this nptlonly is a bad idea
after all?


> The only change I would be tempted to make to your USE flags would be to 
> add multilib, which would give you the ability to build/run both 32 and 
> 64-bit applications.  I don't see how this could fix your current 
> problems...but I did notice that Bob Sanders (one of the two WFM reports 
> on this thread) has this in his USE flags.  Of course he also doesn't 
> have nptlonly, or userlocales, so who knows...

Hmm... I am seeing "(-multilib)" when doing the emerge of gcc and
binutils, so multilib is disabled by my profile and shouldn't be enabled
manually, right?

Thanks,
  jules


-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Can't emerge mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2

[Richard Fish]

Jules Colding wrote:

>Hmm... I am seeing "(-multilib)" when doing the emerge of gcc and
>binutils, so multilib is disabled by my profile and shouldn't be enabled
>manually, right?
>  
>

Could you double check the symlink /etc/make.profile.  AFAIK, you want 
it to point to /usr/portage/profiles/default-linux/amd64/2005.0.

But read this first before changing anything:

http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/base/amd64/howtos/index.xml?part=1&chap=1

-Richard

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Can't emerge mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2

[Jules Colding]

On Sun, 2005-07-24 at 15:51 +0200, Richard Fish wrote:
> Jules Colding wrote:
> 
> >Hmm... I am seeing "(-multilib)" when doing the emerge of gcc and
> >binutils, so multilib is disabled by my profile and shouldn't be enabled
> >manually, right?
> >  
> >
> 
> Could you double check the symlink /etc/make.profile.  AFAIK, you want 
> it to point to /usr/portage/profiles/default-linux/amd64/2005.0.

It does:
colding@omc-2 ~ $ ls -l /etc/make.profile
lrwxrwxrwx  1 root root 50 Jul 19 20:22 /etc/make.profile -> ../usr/portage/profiles/default-linux/amd64/2005.0


> But read this first before changing anything:
> 
> http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/base/amd64/howtos/index.xml?part=1&chap=1

Hmm... I am running 2005.0 (from stage1) and the only content of
2005.0/scripts is "2004.3-2005.0upgrade.sh" so I guess that I shouldn't
need to upgrade anything?

-- 
  jules


-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Can't emerge mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2

[Richard Fish]

Richard Fish wrote:

> Jules Colding wrote:
>
>> Hmm... I am seeing "(-multilib)" when doing the emerge of gcc and
>> binutils, so multilib is disabled by my profile and shouldn't be enabled
>> manually, right?
>>  
>>
>
> Could you double check the symlink /etc/make.profile.  AFAIK, you want 
> it to point to /usr/portage/profiles/default-linux/amd64/2005.0.
>
> But read this first before changing anything:
>
> http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/base/amd64/howtos/index.xml?part=1&chap=1
>

Um, nevermind.  Going back to your original post:

Portage 2.0.51.22-r2 (default-linux/amd64/2005.0, gcc-3.4.3, 
glibc-2.3.5-r0, 2.6.12-gentoo-r6 x86_64)

But maybe you can try to follow their "by hand" instructions for to make 
sure that everything is sane for your profile.

I mean, multilib should be enabled by default, unless you are actually 
linked to the /no-multilib profile...

-Richard

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Can't emerge mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2

[Jules Colding]

On Sun, 2005-07-24 at 15:58 +0200, Richard Fish wrote:
> Richard Fish wrote:
> > Could you double check the symlink /etc/make.profile.  AFAIK, you want 
> > it to point to /usr/portage/profiles/default-linux/amd64/2005.0.
> >
> > But read this first before changing anything:
> >
> > http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/base/amd64/howtos/index.xml?part=1&chap=1
> >
> 
> Um, nevermind.  Going back to your original post:
> 
> Portage 2.0.51.22-r2 (default-linux/amd64/2005.0, gcc-3.4.3, 
> glibc-2.3.5-r0, 2.6.12-gentoo-r6 x86_64)
> 
> But maybe you can try to follow their "by hand" instructions for to make 
> sure that everything is sane for your profile.
> 
> I mean, multilib should be enabled by default, unless you are actually 
> linked to the /no-multilib profile...

I am not, but emerge insists on (-multilib). I don't think the manual
method will work either:

########### snip #############
omc-2 ~ # USE=multilib emerge -va gcc

These are the packages that I would merge, in order:

Calculating dependencies ...done!
[ebuild   R   ] sys-devel/gcc-3.4.3-r1  (-altivec) -bootstrap -boundschecking -build +fortran -gcj +gtk -hardened -ip28 (-multilib) -multislot (-n32) (-n64) +nls -nocxx -nopie -nossp -objc -static 0 kB

Total size of downloads: 0 kB

Do you want me to merge these packages? [Yes/No] no

Quitting.
########### snip #############

The existence of lib32 indicates multilib capabilities, right? I do got
both /usr/lib64 and /usr/lib32.

I think that I will let memtest86+ run overnight and see if it finds
something.

Thanks,
  jules


-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Can't emerge mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2

[Rumen Yotov]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1776 bytes --]

Jules Colding wrote:

>On Sun, 2005-07-24 at 15:58 +0200, Richard Fish wrote:
>  
>
>>Richard Fish wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>Could you double check the symlink /etc/make.profile.  AFAIK, you want 
>>>it to point to /usr/portage/profiles/default-linux/amd64/2005.0.
>>>
>>>But read this first before changing anything:
>>>
>>>http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/base/amd64/howtos/index.xml?part=1&chap=1
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>Um, nevermind.  Going back to your original post:
>>
>>Portage 2.0.51.22-r2 (default-linux/amd64/2005.0, gcc-3.4.3, 
>>glibc-2.3.5-r0, 2.6.12-gentoo-r6 x86_64)
>>
>>But maybe you can try to follow their "by hand" instructions for to make 
>>sure that everything is sane for your profile.
>>
>>I mean, multilib should be enabled by default, unless you are actually 
>>linked to the /no-multilib profile...
>>    
>>
>
>I am not, but emerge insists on (-multilib). I don't think the manual
>method will work either:
>
>########### snip #############
>omc-2 ~ # USE=multilib emerge -va gcc
>
>These are the packages that I would merge, in order:
>
>Calculating dependencies ...done!
>[ebuild   R   ] sys-devel/gcc-3.4.3-r1  (-altivec) -bootstrap -boundschecking -build +fortran -gcj +gtk -hardened -ip28 (-multilib) -multislot (-n32) (-n64) +nls -nocxx -nopie -nossp -objc -static 0 kB
>
>Total size of downloads: 0 kB
>
>Do you want me to merge these packages? [Yes/No] no
>
>Quitting.
>########### snip #############
>
>The existence of lib32 indicates multilib capabilities, right? I do got
>both /usr/lib64 and /usr/lib32.
>
>I think that I will let memtest86+ run overnight and see if it finds
>something.
>
>Thanks,
>  jules
>
>
>  
>
Hi,
No experience with 64-bits, but a USE-flag in () means not supported by
the profile. Have you changed profiles?
HTH. Rumen

[-- Attachment #2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature, Size: 3397 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Can't emerge mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2

[Jules Colding]

On Sun, 2005-07-24 at 17:43 +0300, Rumen Yotov wrote:
> No experience with 64-bits, but a USE-flag in () means not supported by
> the profile. Have you changed profiles?

No.

Thanks,
  jules

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Can't emerge mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2 (AMD64 users please help)

[Richard Fish]

Jules Colding wrote:

>On Sun, 2005-07-24 at 15:58 +0200, Richard Fish wrote:
>  
>
>>Richard Fish wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>Could you double check the symlink /etc/make.profile.  AFAIK, you want 
>>>it to point to /usr/portage/profiles/default-linux/amd64/2005.0.
>>>
>>>But read this first before changing anything:
>>>
>>>http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/base/amd64/howtos/index.xml?part=1&chap=1
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>Um, nevermind.  Going back to your original post:
>>
>>Portage 2.0.51.22-r2 (default-linux/amd64/2005.0, gcc-3.4.3, 
>>glibc-2.3.5-r0, 2.6.12-gentoo-r6 x86_64)
>>
>>But maybe you can try to follow their "by hand" instructions for to make 
>>sure that everything is sane for your profile.
>>
>>I mean, multilib should be enabled by default, unless you are actually 
>>linked to the /no-multilib profile...
>>    
>>
>
>I am not, but emerge insists on (-multilib). I don't think the manual
>method will work either:
>
>########### snip #############
>omc-2 ~ # USE=multilib emerge -va gcc
>
>These are the packages that I would merge, in order:
>
>Calculating dependencies ...done!
>[ebuild   R   ] sys-devel/gcc-3.4.3-r1  (-altivec) -bootstrap -boundschecking -build +fortran -gcj +gtk -hardened -ip28 (-multilib) -multislot (-n32) (-n64) +nls -nocxx -nopie -nossp -objc -static 0 kB
>
>Total size of downloads: 0 kB
>
>Do you want me to merge these packages? [Yes/No] no
>
>Quitting.
>########### snip #############
>
>The existence of lib32 indicates multilib capabilities, right? I do got
>both /usr/lib64 and /usr/lib32.
>
>  
>

How about /emul/linux/x86/lib?

Argh, I don't get it.  /u/p/p/default-linux/amd64/2005.0/use.mask 
contains "multilib", but with a comment stating it is forced on when 
MULTILIB_ABIS is defined, and make.defaults has MULTILIB_ABIS="x86 amd64".

Can any AMD64 users shed some light on this please?

-Richard

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Can't emerge mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2 (AMD64 users please help)

[Jules Colding]

On Sun, 2005-07-24 at 17:06 +0200, Richard Fish wrote:
> >The existence of lib32 indicates multilib capabilities, right? I do
> got
> >both /usr/lib64 and /usr/lib32.
> >
> >  
> >
> 
> How about /emul/linux/x86/lib?

Yes:

colding@omc-2 ~ $ ll /emul/linux/x86/
total 1
drwxr-xr-x  3 root root 1200 Jul 22 00:53 lib
lrwxrwxrwx  1 root root    3 Jul 22 00:53 lib32 -> lib
drwxr-xr-x  3 root root   96 Jul 22 15:16 usr


> Argh, I don't get it.  /u/p/p/default-linux/amd64/2005.0/use.mask 
> contains "multilib", but with a comment stating it is forced on when 
> MULTILIB_ABIS is defined, and make.defaults has MULTILIB_ABIS="x86
> amd64".
> 
> Can any AMD64 users shed some light on this please?

I find it rather strange too...

-- 
  jules


-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Can't emerge mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2 (AMD64 users please help)

[Bob Sanders]

On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 17:06:49 +0200
Richard Fish <bigfish@asmallpond.org> wrote:


> 
> Argh, I don't get it.  /u/p/p/default-linux/amd64/2005.0/use.mask 
> contains "multilib", but with a comment stating it is forced on when 
> MULTILIB_ABIS is defined, and make.defaults has MULTILIB_ABIS="x86 amd64".
> 
> Can any AMD64 users shed some light on this please?
> 

multilib can be, or it used to be able to, turned off so that only 64-bit versions of the
libs get built.

Normally, it should be turned on and set in the USE string, for most folks on a x86_64
platform.  But, on a system without multilib, turning it on means that, as a minimum an -

		emerge -uDav --newuse system

will need to be performed to rebuild gcc, glibc and all the base system libs so that the following
get created - 

	/lib64
	/lib32
	/usr/lib32
	/usr/lib64

and a few other items.

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

Re: [gentoo-user] Can't emerge mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2 (AMD64 users please help)

[Jules Colding]

On Sun, 2005-07-24 at 11:10 -0700, Bob Sanders wrote:
> On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 17:06:49 +0200
> Richard Fish <bigfish@asmallpond.org> wrote:
> 
> 
> > 
> > Argh, I don't get it.  /u/p/p/default-linux/amd64/2005.0/use.mask 
> > contains "multilib", but with a comment stating it is forced on when 
> > MULTILIB_ABIS is defined, and make.defaults has MULTILIB_ABIS="x86 amd64".
> > 
> > Can any AMD64 users shed some light on this please?
> > 
> 
> multilib can be, or it used to be able to, turned off so that only 64-bit versions of the
> libs get built.
> 
> Normally, it should be turned on and set in the USE string, for most folks on a x86_64
> platform.  But, on a system without multilib, turning it on means that, as a minimum an -
> 
> 		emerge -uDav --newuse system
> 
> will need to be performed to rebuild gcc, glibc and all the base system libs so that the following
> get created - 
> 
> 	/lib64
> 	/lib32
> 	/usr/lib32
> 	/usr/lib64

All of those are present on my system, but I am still seeing
"(-multilib)" when I do e.g. "emerge -va glibc".

-- 
  jules


-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Can't emerge mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2 (AMD64 users please help)

[Richard Fish]

Bob Sanders wrote:

>On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 17:06:49 +0200
>Richard Fish <bigfish@asmallpond.org> wrote:
>
>
>  
>
>>Argh, I don't get it.  /u/p/p/default-linux/amd64/2005.0/use.mask 
>>contains "multilib", but with a comment stating it is forced on when 
>>MULTILIB_ABIS is defined, and make.defaults has MULTILIB_ABIS="x86 amd64".
>>
>>Can any AMD64 users shed some light on this please?
>>
>>    
>>
>
>multilib can be, or it used to be able to, turned off so that only 64-bit versions of the
>libs get built.
>
>  
>

Hi Bob,

Looking back at your previous post, I see you are still using the 2004.3 
AMD profile?  Have you tried to upgrade to the 2005.0 profile?  Does 
2004.3 seem stable, and would you recommend that Jules downgrade to that?

-Richard

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Can't emerge mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2 (AMD64 users please help)

[Bob Sanders]

On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 21:14:07 +0200
Richard Fish <bigfish@asmallpond.org> wrote:



> Hi Bob,
> 
> Looking back at your previous post, I see you are still using the 2004.3 
> AMD profile?  Have you tried to upgrade to the 2005.0 profile?  Does 
> 2004.3 seem stable, and would you recommend that Jules downgrade to that?
> 
> -Richard
> 

No as it hasn't been set up for the migration.  Or should I say cleanly setup.  The real
profile will arrive sometime between 2005.1 and 2005.2, it memory serves.  I haven't
seen it discussed on the Gentoo-amd64 mailing list in awhile now.

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

Re: [gentoo-user] Can't emerge mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2

[Zac Medico]

Jules Colding wrote:
> On Sun, 2005-07-24 at 15:20 +0200, Richard Fish wrote:
> 
>>Jules Colding wrote:
>>
>>>Hmm... Among my USE flags is "nptlonly". Might that be a problem?
>>>
>>
>>Well, nptlonly seems to work for a lot of people, so I don't think that 
>>should be a problem.  I've only ever heard of it affecting old 
>>binary-only software.
> 
> 
> I am seeing random crashes of Evolution. The backtrace originates, as
> far I know, always in libpthread, so maybe this nptlonly is a bad idea
> after all?
> 

IMO that would be reading too much out of the a single segfault.  You certainly have some instability but it is most likely rooted elsewhere.

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

Re: [gentoo-user] Can't emerge mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2

[neil]

Jules Colding wrote:

> Hmm... Among my USE flags is "nptlonly". Might that be a problem?
> 

I don't think so as I have that too.


Be lucky,

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

Re: [gentoo-user] Can't emerge mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2

[Jules Colding]

On Sat, 2005-07-23 at 11:51 -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
> Jules Colding wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > "emerge --sync && emerge -vauDN" today gave me the following error.
> > 
> [snip]
> >   adding: content/cookie/contents.rdf (stored 0%)
> > +++ making
> chrome /var/tmp/portage/mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2/work/mozilla/extensions/cookie  => ../../dist/bin/chrome/modern.jar
> >         zip warning: ../modern.jar not found or empty
> >   adding: skin/modern/communicator/cookie/taskbar-cookie.gif (stored
> 0%)
> >   adding: skin/modern/communicator/cookie/status-cookie.gif (stored
> 0%)
> > +++ making chrome /var/tmp/portage/homedir
> => ../../dist/bin/chrome/classic.jar
> > error: file './resources/skin/classic/taskbar-cookie.gif' doesn't
> exist at ../../config/make-jars.pl line 418.
> 
> This seems like a continuation of the previous build problems that you
> have had with firefox (where we were discussing MAKEOPTS).  

Yes, that is my thought too.

> Assuming that others cannot reproduce this (sorry, I don't have my
> amd64 right now), there's still something wrong with your build system
> somewhere.  

I think that I am the only one that can show the problem so you might
very well be correct.

> This could be a shot in the dark, but I think that you should remerge
> your autoconf and automake packages to see if that affects this.

I'll be doing that.

Thanks,
  jules


-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Can't emerge mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2

[Jules Colding]

On Sun, 2005-07-24 at 14:22 +0200, Jules Colding wrote:
> On Sat, 2005-07-23 at 11:51 -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
> > Jules Colding wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > > "emerge --sync && emerge -vauDN" today gave me the following error.
> > > 
> > [snip]
> > >   adding: content/cookie/contents.rdf (stored 0%)
> > > +++ making
> > chrome /var/tmp/portage/mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2/work/mozilla/extensions/cookie  => ../../dist/bin/chrome/modern.jar
> > >         zip warning: ../modern.jar not found or empty
> > >   adding: skin/modern/communicator/cookie/taskbar-cookie.gif (stored
> > 0%)
> > >   adding: skin/modern/communicator/cookie/status-cookie.gif (stored
> > 0%)
> > > +++ making chrome /var/tmp/portage/homedir
> > => ../../dist/bin/chrome/classic.jar
> > > error: file './resources/skin/classic/taskbar-cookie.gif' doesn't
> > exist at ../../config/make-jars.pl line 418.
> > 
> > This seems like a continuation of the previous build problems that you
> > have had with firefox (where we were discussing MAKEOPTS).  
> 
> Yes, that is my thought too.
> 
> > Assuming that others cannot reproduce this (sorry, I don't have my
> > amd64 right now), there's still something wrong with your build system
> > somewhere.  
> 
> I think that I am the only one that can show the problem so you might
> very well be correct.
> 
> > This could be a shot in the dark, but I think that you should remerge
> > your autoconf and automake packages to see if that affects this.
> 
> I'll be doing that.

OK, I get a segfault doing that:

############## snip ###############
test -z "/usr/share/automake-1.9/Automake" || mkdir -p -- "/var/tmp/portage/automake-1.9.5/image//usr/share/automake-1.9/Automake"
 /bin/install -c -m 644 'Config.pm' '/var/tmp/portage/automake-1.9.5/image//usr/share/automake-1.9/Automake/Config.pm'
make[4]: Leaving directory `/var/tmp/portage/automake-1.9.5/work/automake-1.9.5/lib/Automake'
make[3]: Leaving directory `/var/tmp/portage/automake-1.9.5/work/automake-1.9.5/lib/Automake'
make[2]: Leaving directory `/var/tmp/portage/automake-1.9.5/work/automake-1.9.5/lib/Automake'
Making install in am
make[2]: Entering directory `/var/tmp/portage/automake-1.9.5/work/automake-1.9.5/lib/am'
make[3]: Entering directory `/var/tmp/portage/automake-1.9.5/work/automake-1.9.5/lib/am'
make[3]: Nothing to be done for `install-exec-am'.
test -z "/usr/share/automake-1.9/am" || mkdir -p -- "/var/tmp/portage/automake-1.9.5/image//usr/share/automake-1.9/am"
/bin/sh: line 1: 16093 Segmentation fault      mkdir -p -- "/var/tmp/portage/automake-1.9.5/image//usr/share/automake-1.9/am"
make[3]: *** [install-dist_amDATA] Error 139
make[3]: Leaving directory `/var/tmp/portage/automake-1.9.5/work/automake-1.9.5/lib/am'
make[2]: *** [install-am] Error 2
make[2]: Leaving directory `/var/tmp/portage/automake-1.9.5/work/automake-1.9.5/lib/am'
make[1]: *** [install-recursive] Error 1
make[1]: Leaving directory `/var/tmp/portage/automake-1.9.5/work/automake-1.9.5/lib'
make: *** [install-recursive] Error 1

!!! ERROR: sys-devel/automake-1.9.5 failed.
!!! Function src_install, Line 36, Exitcode 2
!!! (no error message)
!!! If you need support, post the topmost build error, NOT this status message.
############## snip ###############

Wouldn't it be a good idea on this point to reemerge coreutils or maybe
the whole of "system"? 

Is the correct way doing:

emerge -e system
emerge -e system
emerge -e world
emerge -e world

? or is a single "emerge -e system" sufficient?

Thanks,
  jules


-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Can't emerge mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2

[Richard Fish]

Jules Colding wrote:

>>>This could be a shot in the dark, but I think that you should remerge
>>>your autoconf and automake packages to see if that affects this.
>>>      
>>>
>>I'll be doing that.
>>    
>>
>
>OK, I get a segfault doing that:
>
>############## snip ###############
>test -z "/usr/share/automake-1.9/Automake" || mkdir -p -- "/var/tmp/portage/automake-1.9.5/image//usr/share/automake-1.9/Automake"
> /bin/install -c -m 644 'Config.pm' '/var/tmp/portage/automake-1.9.5/image//usr/share/automake-1.9/Automake/Config.pm'
>make[4]: Leaving directory `/var/tmp/portage/automake-1.9.5/work/automake-1.9.5/lib/Automake'
>make[3]: Leaving directory `/var/tmp/portage/automake-1.9.5/work/automake-1.9.5/lib/Automake'
>make[2]: Leaving directory `/var/tmp/portage/automake-1.9.5/work/automake-1.9.5/lib/Automake'
>Making install in am
>make[2]: Entering directory `/var/tmp/portage/automake-1.9.5/work/automake-1.9.5/lib/am'
>make[3]: Entering directory `/var/tmp/portage/automake-1.9.5/work/automake-1.9.5/lib/am'
>make[3]: Nothing to be done for `install-exec-am'.
>test -z "/usr/share/automake-1.9/am" || mkdir -p -- "/var/tmp/portage/automake-1.9.5/image//usr/share/automake-1.9/am"
>/bin/sh: line 1: 16093 Segmentation fault      mkdir -p -- "/var/tmp/portage/automake-1.9.5/image//usr/share/automake-1.9/am"
>make[3]: *** [install-dist_amDATA] Error 139
>make[3]: Leaving directory `/var/tmp/portage/automake-1.9.5/work/automake-1.9.5/lib/am'
>make[2]: *** [install-am] Error 2
>make[2]: Leaving directory `/var/tmp/portage/automake-1.9.5/work/automake-1.9.5/lib/am'
>make[1]: *** [install-recursive] Error 1
>make[1]: Leaving directory `/var/tmp/portage/automake-1.9.5/work/automake-1.9.5/lib'
>make: *** [install-recursive] Error 1
>
>!!! ERROR: sys-devel/automake-1.9.5 failed.
>!!! Function src_install, Line 36, Exitcode 2
>!!! (no error message)
>!!! If you need support, post the topmost build error, NOT this status message.
>############## snip ###############
>
>Wouldn't it be a good idea on this point to reemerge coreutils or maybe
>the whole of "system"? 
>
>Is the correct way doing:
>
>emerge -e system
>emerge -e system
>emerge -e world
>emerge -e world
>
>  
>

Well, since world includes system, if you want to rebuild *everything*, 
I would think the following should be sufficient

emerge --oneshot gcc binutils
(check gcc-config and binutils-config to ensure sanity)
emerge -e world

The above should ensure that everything gets rebuilt with the rebuilt 
version of gcc and binutils.

To save some time, you could try just system instead of world.  That 
*should* still give you a sane build environment, but if you get many 
more segfaults, I am going to start thinking that you have some hardware 
problems...

-Richard

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Can't emerge mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2

[Jules Colding]

On Sun, 2005-07-24 at 14:48 +0200, Richard Fish wrote:
> Well, since world includes system, if you want to rebuild *everything*, 
> I would think the following should be sufficient
> 
> emerge --oneshot gcc binutils

OK. What about glibc or is that just a part of "world"? 

-- 
  jules


-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Can't emerge mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2

[Richard Fish]

Jules Colding wrote:

>On Sun, 2005-07-24 at 14:48 +0200, Richard Fish wrote:
>  
>
>>Well, since world includes system, if you want to rebuild *everything*, 
>>I would think the following should be sufficient
>>
>>emerge --oneshot gcc binutils
>>    
>>
>
>OK. What about glibc or is that just a part of "world"? 
>
>  
>

It is part of world.  On my system it would be the 152nd package to be 
rebuilt.

Technically, both gcc and binutils are also part of world, and will be 
built twice with the above instructions, but since they generate just 
about everything else, you want to make sure those are sane before starting.

-Richard

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Can't emerge mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2

[Rumen Yotov]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1414 bytes --]

Jules Colding wrote:

>On Sun, 2005-07-24 at 14:22 +0200, Jules Colding wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 2005-07-23 at 11:51 -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
>>
>>>Jules Colding wrote:
>>>
>>>>Hi,
>>>>
>>>>"emerge --sync && emerge -vauDN" today gave me the following error.
>>>>
>>>[snip]
>>>
>>>> adding: content/cookie/contents.rdf (stored 0%)
>>>>+++ making
>>>
>>>chrome
/var/tmp/portage/mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2/work/mozilla/extensions/cookie
=> ../../dist/bin/chrome/modern.jar
>>>
>>>> zip warning: ../modern.jar not found or empty
>>>> adding: skin/modern/communicator/cookie/taskbar-cookie.gif (stored
>>>
>>>0%)
>>>
>>>> adding: skin/modern/communicator/cookie/status-cookie.gif (stored

...SKIP...

>!!! ERROR: sys-devel/automake-1.9.5 failed.
>!!! Function src_install, Line 36, Exitcode 2
>!!! (no error message)
>!!! If you need support, post the topmost build error, NOT this status
message.
>############## snip ###############
>
>Wouldn't it be a good idea on this point to reemerge coreutils or maybe
>the whole of "system"?
>
>Is the correct way doing:
>
>emerge -e system
>emerge -e system
>emerge -e world
>emerge -e world
>
>? or is a single "emerge -e system" sufficient?
>
>Thanks,
> jules
>
>
Hi,
Don't have any new idea, but could you check if there are some
"hardened" USE-flags in your /etc/make.conf (like 'pic', 'pie',
'hardened' etc). Using some of them on a normal system may cause problems.
HTH. Rumen


[-- Attachment #2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature, Size: 3397 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Can't emerge mozilla-firefox-1.0.6-r2

[Jules Colding]

On Sun, 2005-07-24 at 16:28 +0300, Rumen Yotov wrote:

> Hi,
> Don't have any new idea, but could you check if there are some
> "hardened" USE-flags in your /etc/make.conf (like 'pic', 'pie',
> 'hardened' etc). Using some of them on a normal system may cause problems.
> HTH. Rumen

Nope, none.

Thanks,
  jules

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list