From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EEAyW-00089L-Ne for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 10 Sep 2005 19:25:21 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id j8AJKL1K003793; Sat, 10 Sep 2005 19:20:21 GMT Received: from mail.t-systems.cz (mail.t-systems.cz [212.67.76.249]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j8AJGdn2023039 for ; Sat, 10 Sep 2005 19:16:39 GMT Received: from mefisto.t-systems.cz (faust.t-systems.cz [10.246.110.12]) by mail.t-systems.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id A26158997C for ; Sat, 10 Sep 2005 21:19:32 +0200 (CEST) Received: from andre.t-systems.cz ([10.246.112.240]) by mefisto.t-systems.cz with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Sat, 10 Sep 2005 21:19:32 +0200 Received: andre.t-systems.cz 10.246.112.240 from 10.246.112.176 10.246.112.176 via HTTP with MS-WebStorage 6.5.6944 Received: from frankies by andre.t-systems.cz; 31 Dec 1987 23:18:00 +0000 Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Nasty bugs in portage? From: Frank Schafer To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <01e301c5b636$aed522a0$0a00a8c0@butthead> References: <1126375769.5733.59.camel@localhost.localdomain> <01e301c5b636$aed522a0$0a00a8c0@butthead> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Fri, 01 Jan 1988 00:18:00 +0100 Message-Id: <567991080.5928.9.camel@localhost.localdomain> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.1.1 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Sep 2005 19:19:32.0430 (UTC) FILETIME=[92A1D6E0:01C5B63C] X-T-Systems_Czech-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-T-Systems_Czech-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam (whitelisted), SpamAssassin (score=-5.177, required 5, autolearn=not spam, ALL_TRUSTED -3.30, AWL -0.64, BAYES_00 -2.60, DATE_IN_PAST_96_XX 1.36) X-MailScanner-From: frank.schafer@t-systems.cz X-Archives-Salt: 3761f155-e89c-4064-8365-8e3dccb37d73 X-Archives-Hash: 3ddce098e37a6a4ba91998bc555220f5 On Sat, 2005-09-10 at 14:37 -0400, Dave Nebinger wrote: > > When I returned home from work I found in the logs, that ``emerge > > --emptytree system'' failed at package 28 of 186 > > > > python-fcksum-1.7.1 > > i386-pc-linux-gnu-gcc ....bla...bla > > ^ > > | > > +- !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! > > > > gcc-config error: > > could not run/locate "i386-pc-linux-gnu-gcc" > > My guess is that during the -emptytree system emergence that gcc was built > to target your system. > > Sometimes when this happens the internal build system gets a little confused > when it is time to switch over, but this is easily resolved by running the > fix_libtool_files.sh script in /sbin. > > You would need to do this when you get errors similar to that listed above. > > The good news is that you'll only need to do this during the beginning when > the system is being built from scratch; once you're up and running you > normally won't need to do this again. I don't get You at this point. I'll have to start ''emerge --emptytree system'', wait until it crashes, run ''fix_libtool_files.sh'' and run ''emerge --emptytree system'' ones more, hoping that it won't crash this time? Or should I go to a second virtual console, chroot there too, wait until gcc was built on the first console and run ''fix_libtool_files.sh'' from there? ''emerge system'' builds glibc, gcc, gcc-config (yes there is "Switching native compiler to i686-pc-linux-gnu-3.3.6" in the log) and then the packages for which the build crashes. How can I run ''fix_libtool_files.sh'' between ONE COMMAND?????? > > automake-1.25-r3 > > autoconf-2.58 or better is required > > > > Why the hell do we try to install x versions of autoconf and > > automake????? > > Because packages have individual automake/autoconf version requirements. > Each automake/autoconf is slotted, they don't take up much disk, and they're > good to have around for a successful emerge. > > > So my presumption for the time demand of a Gentoo installation looks > > like this. > > > > A breakage will occure every 15'th package (2 breakages during the first > > 30 within 2 days). > > That's an analysis based upon two initial emptytree emerges. I would expect > that for the 200 package estimate that you're using you will probably > encounter a total of 4 breaks (I think that's what I had, it was so long > ago, but there was one fix_libtool_files.sh run and a couple of changes to > /etc/portage/package.keywords to enable ~x86 versions of a few packages > where I needed a later version). > > Completing an install in 4 days will not be a problem if you have the time > to check on the emerge process every now and then and resolve the minor > problems that crop up. > > > So which distribution would you suggest me to install during less than 4 > > days? I'm wondering about Slackware. > > You can still stick with gentoo ;-) > > If you don't have the time to watch over the stage 1 build process, you can > jump straight to a stage 3 then update packages from there. > Well, that's the same ads installing Fedora (within 2 hours). -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list