5:43 a.m.
this is massively off-topic but i'm hoping someone's bored enough to
take a look. i have a beagleboard:
http://beagleboard.org
and am trying to build the angstrom OS for it. the build (using the
openembedded (OE) build utility) should be fairly straightforward but
trying this under my current 64-bit install of f11 preview fails each
time thusly:
... snip ...
ccache gcc
-isystem/home/rpjday/oe/angstrom-dev/staging/x86_64-linux/usr/include
-O2 -Wunused -Wall -static
-L/home/rpjday/oe/angstrom-dev/staging/x86_64-linux/usr/lib
-Wl,-rpath-link,/home/rpjday/oe/angstrom-dev/staging/x86_64-linux/usr/lib
-Wl,-rpath,/home/rpjday/oe/angstrom-dev/staging/x86_64-linux/usr/lib
-Wl,-O1 -o insmod.static insmod.o
mv -f .deps/tables.Tpo .deps/tables.Po
/usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lc
collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
make: *** [insmod.static] Error 1
make: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
modinfo.c: In function 'main':
modinfo.c:338: warning: 'infosize' may be used uninitialized in this
function
mv -f .deps/modinfo.Tpo .deps/modinfo.Po
make: *** wait: No child processes. Stop.
FATAL: oe_runmake failed
i've documented, step by step, what i did here:
http://www.crashcourse.ca/wiki/index.php/Angstrom#Building_Angstrom_from_...
and it's frustrating since others have reported normal success (some
running under fedora 8). i have no idea why i keep getting this error
-- maybe it's related to running 64-bit, i don't know. others are
building just fine under other distros as well, so i'm baffled.
thoughts? at this point, i'm really open to suggestions. if you've
never played with openembedded, here's your chance. :-)
rday
--
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry.
Web page: http://crashcourse.ca
Linked In: http://www.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday
========================================================================
5:55 a.m.
Robert P. J. Day wrote:
this is massively off-topic but i'm hoping someone's bored
enough to
take a look. i have a beagleboard:
ccache gcc
-isystem/home/rpjday/oe/angstrom-dev/staging/x86_64-linux/usr/include
-O2 -Wunused -Wall -static
-L/home/rpjday/oe/angstrom-dev/staging/x86_64-linux/usr/lib
-Wl,-rpath-link,/home/rpjday/oe/angstrom-dev/staging/x86_64-linux/usr/lib
-Wl,-rpath,/home/rpjday/oe/angstrom-dev/staging/x86_64-linux/usr/lib
-Wl,-O1 -o insmod.static insmod.o
mv -f .deps/tables.Tpo .deps/tables.Po
/usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lc
collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
make: *** [insmod.static] Error 1
make: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
modinfo.c: In function 'main':
modinfo.c:338: warning: 'infosize' may be used uninitialized in this
function
mv -f .deps/modinfo.Tpo .deps/modinfo.Po
make: *** wait: No child processes. Stop.
FATAL: oe_runmake failed
i've documented, step by step, what i did here:
http://www.crashcourse.ca/wiki/index.php/Angstrom#Building_Angstrom_from_...
and it's frustrating since others have reported normal success (some
running under fedora 8). i have no idea why i keep getting this error
-- maybe it's related to running 64-bit, i don't know. others are
building just fine under other distros as well, so i'm baffled.
The gcc call above seems to be trying to link statically against libc
(An absurd idea, IMNSHO).
In FC11, the static libs from glibc have been split out into a separate
"glibc-static" package.
It's likely getting rid of the static linkage above or
installing "glibc-static" (BuildRequires: glibc-static) will help.
Ralf
6:02 a.m.
On Sun, 31 May 2009, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> ccache gcc
> -isystem/home/rpjday/oe/angstrom-dev/staging/x86_64-linux/usr/include
> -O2 -Wunused -Wall -static
> -L/home/rpjday/oe/angstrom-dev/staging/x86_64-linux/usr/lib
> -Wl,-rpath-link,/home/rpjday/oe/angstrom-dev/staging/x86_64-linux/usr/lib
> -Wl,-rpath,/home/rpjday/oe/angstrom-dev/staging/x86_64-linux/usr/lib
> -Wl,-O1 -o insmod.static insmod.o
> mv -f .deps/tables.Tpo .deps/tables.Po
> /usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lc
> collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
> make: *** [insmod.static] Error 1
> make: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
> modinfo.c: In function 'main':
> modinfo.c:338: warning: 'infosize' may be used uninitialized in this
> function
> mv -f .deps/modinfo.Tpo .deps/modinfo.Po
> make: *** wait: No child processes. Stop.
> FATAL: oe_runmake failed
The gcc call above seems to be trying to link statically against
libc (An absurd idea, IMNSHO).
In FC11, the static libs from glibc have been split out into a
separate "glibc-static" package.
It's likely getting rid of the static linkage above or installing
"glibc-static" (BuildRequires: glibc-static) will help.
ooooh, that could be it. amusingly, i was looking at that earlier
this morning and thinking, "is it the static linkage that's doing
this?" and, sure enough, that package wasn't installed on my system
so i'll test it shortly. thanks.
um ... given your wording, can i assume that f11 is the first
fedora where this package has been broken out? which would explain
why this builds just fine under f10 for others?
rday
--
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry.
Web page: http://crashcourse.ca
Linked In: http://www.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday
========================================================================
6:12 a.m.
On Sun, 31 May 2009, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
On 05/31/2009 04:32 PM, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> um ... given your wording, can i assume that f11 is the first
> fedora where this package has been broken out? which would explain
> why this builds just fine under f10 for others?
Correct.
that appears to have fixed it. yee ha! buckets of thanks. i can
now update the wiki page to cover f11.
rday
--
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry.
Web page: http://crashcourse.ca
Linked In: http://www.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday
========================================================================
6:17 a.m.
On 05/31/2009 04:42 PM, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
On Sun, 31 May 2009, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> On 05/31/2009 04:32 PM, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
>
>> um ... given your wording, can i assume that f11 is the first
>> fedora where this package has been broken out? which would explain
>> why this builds just fine under f10 for others?
>
> Correct.
that appears to have fixed it. yee ha! buckets of thanks. i can
now update the wiki page to cover f11.
You might want to tell upstream that static linking isn't the
recommended path.
http://people.redhat.com/drepper/no_static_linking.html
Rahul
6:21 a.m.
On Sun, 31 May 2009, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
On 05/31/2009 04:42 PM, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> On Sun, 31 May 2009, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>
>> On 05/31/2009 04:32 PM, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
>>
>>> um ... given your wording, can i assume that f11 is the first
>>> fedora where this package has been broken out? which would explain
>>> why this builds just fine under f10 for others?
>>
>> Correct.
>
> that appears to have fixed it. yee ha! buckets of thanks. i can
> now update the wiki page to cover f11.
You might want to tell upstream that static linking isn't the
recommended path.
http://people.redhat.com/drepper/no_static_linking.html
and yet f11 contains the statically-linked "insmod.static"
executable, which is exactly what is being created at that step. so
what's the difference?
rday
--
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry.
Web page: http://crashcourse.ca
Linked In: http://www.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday
========================================================================
6:31 a.m.
On 05/31/2009 04:51 PM, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
and yet f11 contains the statically-linked "insmod.static"
executable, which is exactly what is being created at that step. so
what's the difference?
The static libraries are provided in Fedora as a workaround to get such
applications building but it isn't the recommended path.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Packaging_Static_Libr...
Rahul
6:33 a.m.
On Sun, 31 May 2009, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
On 05/31/2009 04:51 PM, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
>
> and yet f11 contains the statically-linked "insmod.static"
> executable, which is exactly what is being created at that step. so
> what's the difference?
The static libraries are provided in Fedora as a workaround to get such
applications building but it isn't the recommended path.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Packaging_Static_Libr...
gotcha. thanks.
rday
--
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry.
Web page: http://crashcourse.ca
Linked In: http://www.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday
========================================================================
2:54 a.m.
On 05/31/2009 04:32 PM, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> um ... given your wording, can i assume that f11 is the first
> fedora where this package has been broken out? which would explain
> why this builds just fine under f10 for others?
>
On Sun, 31 May 2009, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> Correct.
On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 1:12 PM, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
that appears to have fixed it. yee ha! buckets of thanks. i can
now update the wiki page to cover f11.
Hello,
I think I will add "glibc-static" into FEL's section on the comps.xml.
Hence it will reduce pain for embedded designers.
Robert,
Since you are compiling from scratch, is it possible for you to
package some of the bits into Fedora ? It would really help many
fedora users.
Every Fedora event, someone pops out to ask for more embedded tools on
Fedora. We are currently packaging openocd for fedora. But we need an
expert in the embedded field to guide us.
Kind regards,
Chitlesh
3:03 a.m.
Chitlesh GOORAH wrote:
> On 05/31/2009 04:32 PM, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
>
>> um ... given your wording, can i assume that f11 is the first
>> fedora where this package has been broken out? which would explain
>> why this builds just fine under f10 for others?
>>
> On Sun, 31 May 2009, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>> Correct.
On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 1:12 PM, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> that appears to have fixed it. yee ha! buckets of thanks. i can
> now update the wiki page to cover f11.
Hello,
I think I will add "glibc-static" into FEL's section on the comps.xml.
A mistake.
Hence it will reduce pain for embedded designers.
How so? I
don't see this.
Ralf
5:22 a.m.
On Tue, 2 Jun 2009, Chitlesh GOORAH wrote:
> On 05/31/2009 04:32 PM, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
>
> > um ... given your wording, can i assume that f11 is the first
> > fedora where this package has been broken out? which would
> > explain why this builds just fine under f10 for others?
> >
> On Sun, 31 May 2009, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> > Correct.
On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 1:12 PM, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> that appears to have fixed it. yee ha! buckets of thanks. i
> can now update the wiki page to cover f11.
Hello,
I think I will add "glibc-static" into FEL's section on the comps.xml.
Hence it will reduce pain for embedded designers.
i'm not convinced that's a good idea. there's no point polluting
the group sections with packages that might not be necessary. i think
it will be sufficient for tools like openembedded to generate their
own warnings. this isn't a fedora problem, let's not make it one.
rday
--
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry.
Web page: http://crashcourse.ca
Linked In: http://www.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday
========================================================================
2:47 p.m.
Maybe I'll even buy a Beagleboard. This took several hours to do, all
day on my Dell Latitude E6400 laptop in fact, but it seems to have worked.
Results under Fedora 11, meaning this version exactly
[rlc@deafeng3 openembedded]$ uname -a
Linux deafeng3.signtype.info 2.6.29.4-167.fc11.x86_64 #1 SMP Wed May 27
17:27:08 EDT 2009 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
[rlc@deafeng3 openembedded]$ cat /etc/fedora-release
Fedora release 11 (Leonidas)
[From `bitbake base-image`:]
NOTE: Tasks Summary: Attempted 2946 tasks of which 0 didn't need to be
rerun and 0 failed.
NOTE: build 200905310908: completed
[rlc@deafeng3 openembedded]$ bitbake console-image
NOTE: Handling BitBake files: - (6650/6650) [100 %]
NOTE: Parsing finished. 6368 cached, 0 parsed, 282 skipped, 0 masked.
NOTE: Cache is clean, not saving.
NOTE: build 200905311345: started
.....
NOTE: Tasks Summary: Attempted 2928 tasks of which 2890 didn't need to
be rerun and 0 failed.
NOTE: build 200905311345: completed
[rlc@deafeng3 openembedded]$ bitbake x11-image
NOTE: Handling BitBake files: - (6650/6650) [100 %]
NOTE: Parsing finished. 6368 cached, 0 parsed, 282 skipped, 0 masked.
NOTE: Cache is clean, not saving.
NOTE: build 200905311351: started
OE Build Configuration:
BB_VERSION = "1.8.12"
METADATA_BRANCH = "stable/2009"
METADATA_REVISION = "901e7c5b47b9f3695cef841e6c8663d37c932fec"
TARGET_ARCH = "arm"
TARGET_OS = "linux-gnueabi"
MACHINE = "beagleboard"
DISTRO = "angstrom"
DISTRO_VERSION = "2009.X-test-20090531"
TARGET_FPU = "hard"
NOTE: Resolving any missing task queue dependencies
NOTE: preferred version git of u-boot not available (for item u-boot)
NOTE: preferred version git of u-boot not available (for item u-boot)
....
....
NOTE: Tasks Summary: Attempted 6096 tasks of which 2908 didn't need to
be rerun and 0 failed.
NOTE: build 200905311351: completed
On 05/31/2009 06:43 AM, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
this is massively off-topic but i'm hoping someone's bored
enough to
take a look. i have a beagleboard:
http://beagleboard.org
and am trying to build the angstrom OS for it. the build (using the
openembedded (OE) build utility) should be fairly straightforward but
trying this under my current 64-bit install of f11 preview fails each
time thusly:
... snip ...
ccache gcc
-isystem/home/rpjday/oe/angstrom-dev/staging/x86_64-linux/usr/include
-O2 -Wunused -Wall -static
-L/home/rpjday/oe/angstrom-dev/staging/x86_64-linux/usr/lib
-Wl,-rpath-link,/home/rpjday/oe/angstrom-dev/staging/x86_64-linux/usr/lib
-Wl,-rpath,/home/rpjday/oe/angstrom-dev/staging/x86_64-linux/usr/lib
-Wl,-O1 -o insmod.static insmod.o
mv -f .deps/tables.Tpo .deps/tables.Po
/usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lc
collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
make: *** [insmod.static] Error 1
make: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
modinfo.c: In function 'main':
modinfo.c:338: warning: 'infosize' may be used uninitialized in this
function
mv -f .deps/modinfo.Tpo .deps/modinfo.Po
make: *** wait: No child processes. Stop.
FATAL: oe_runmake failed
i've documented, step by step, what i did here:
http://www.crashcourse.ca/wiki/index.php/Angstrom#Building_Angstrom_from_...
and it's frustrating since others have reported normal success (some
running under fedora 8). i have no idea why i keep getting this error
-- maybe it's related to running 64-bit, i don't know. others are
building just fine under other distros as well, so i'm baffled.
thoughts? at this point, i'm really open to suggestions. if you've
never played with openembedded, here's your chance. :-)
rday
--
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry.
Web page: http://crashcourse.ca
Linked In: http://www.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday
========================================================================
3:45 p.m.
On Sun, 31 May 2009, Robert L Cochran wrote:
Maybe I'll even buy a Beagleboard. This took several hours to
do,
all day on my Dell Latitude E6400 laptop in fact, but it seems to
have worked.
Results under Fedora 11, meaning this version exactly
[rlc@deafeng3 openembedded]$ uname -a
Linux deafeng3.signtype.info 2.6.29.4-167.fc11.x86_64 #1 SMP Wed May 27
17:27:08 EDT 2009 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
[rlc@deafeng3 openembedded]$ cat /etc/fedora-release
Fedora release 11 (Leonidas)
[From `bitbake base-image`:]
NOTE: Tasks Summary: Attempted 2946 tasks of which 0 didn't need to be rerun
and 0 failed.
NOTE: build 200905310908: completed
[rlc@deafeng3 openembedded]$ bitbake console-image
NOTE: Handling BitBake files: - (6650/6650) [100 %]
NOTE: Parsing finished. 6368 cached, 0 parsed, 282 skipped, 0 masked.
NOTE: Cache is clean, not saving.
NOTE: build 200905311345: started
.....
NOTE: Tasks Summary: Attempted 2928 tasks of which 2890 didn't need to be
rerun and 0 failed.
NOTE: build 200905311345: completed
[rlc@deafeng3 openembedded]$ bitbake x11-image
NOTE: Handling BitBake files: - (6650/6650) [100 %]
NOTE: Parsing finished. 6368 cached, 0 parsed, 282 skipped, 0 masked.
NOTE: Cache is clean, not saving.
NOTE: build 200905311351: started
OE Build Configuration:
BB_VERSION = "1.8.12"
METADATA_BRANCH = "stable/2009"
METADATA_REVISION = "901e7c5b47b9f3695cef841e6c8663d37c932fec"
TARGET_ARCH = "arm"
TARGET_OS = "linux-gnueabi"
MACHINE = "beagleboard"
DISTRO = "angstrom"
DISTRO_VERSION = "2009.X-test-20090531"
TARGET_FPU = "hard"
NOTE: Resolving any missing task queue dependencies
NOTE: preferred version git of u-boot not available (for item u-boot)
NOTE: preferred version git of u-boot not available (for item u-boot)
....
....
NOTE: Tasks Summary: Attempted 6096 tasks of which 2908 didn't need to be
rerun and 0 failed.
NOTE: build 200905311351: completed
please tell me you had the glibc-static package installed, cuz if
you didn't, then i'm going to be confused again. at the moment,
mine's still building but i'm past the point where it was failing
before because of that issue.
rday
--
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry.
Web page: http://crashcourse.ca
Linked In: http://www.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday
========================================================================
6:14 p.m.
please tell me you had the glibc-static package installed, cuz if
you didn't, then i'm going to be confused again. at the moment,
mine's still building but i'm past the point where it was failing
before because of that issue.
rday
--
Yes I installed glibc-static and texi2html after carefully reading your
posts, your wiki, the Angstrom web page and the initial `bitbake
base-image` output. Success in building software comes from reading the
docs, initial failure, and trying again. The build took a long, long
time for me and all worked well.
Since you have a Beagle Board can you post photos of it in use on your
wiki? Or send me photos offlist, if possible? I'm very curious as to
your results. If my guess is correct you even had to pay additional
taxes to get the Beagle Board from Digi-Key...unless, of course, you
drove to Digi-Key's location and took delivery at their sales counter.
Not that I know if they do that. So you must have a strong reason to get
this board.
Bob
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry.
Web page: http://crashcourse.ca
Linked In: http://www.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday
========================================================================
6:14 a.m.
On Sun, 31 May 2009, Robert L Cochran wrote:
Yes I installed glibc-static and texi2html after carefully reading
your posts, your wiki, the Angstrom web page and the initial
`bitbake base-image` output. Success in building software comes from
reading the docs, initial failure, and trying again. The build took
a long, long time for me and all worked well.
yes, it takes a while. the "start the build and go out drinking"
type of while.
Since you have a Beagle Board can you post photos of it in use on
your wiki? Or send me photos offlist, if possible? I'm very curious
as to your results.
there's plenty of BB-related stuff at the main web site:
http://beagleboard.org. lots of cool pix, lots of links, lots of
people doing wicked cool stuff with it -- audio, video, etc.
If my guess is correct you even had to pay additional taxes to get
the Beagle Board from Digi-Key...unless, of course, you drove to
Digi-Key's location and took delivery at their sales counter. Not
that I know if they do that.
if you're in canada, http://digikey.ca. no big deal.
So you must have a strong reason to get this board.
just playing -- it's a cheap option for getting into embedded linux.
and, just to be clear, obviously this board isn't technically related
to fedora test releases -- i only asked here since it was clear that
there was *something* fedora-related to the build failing, i just
couldn't figure out what. when others are saying, "hey, i'm using
ubuntu, it builds just fine," there's some incentive to figure out
what it is about fedora that's mucking things up. and the solution
turned out to be fairly trivial. (i might even put in a request that
the build process check for that and issue a warning to f11 users.)
in any event, it's a cool toy, particularly for folks who want to
get into android, given the growing popularity of android on
linux-based phones. there's an android port for the beagleboard so
you have a cheap way of jumping in. the only slight drawback is that,
while there's buckets of online docs, sometimes it's hard to track it
all down, which is why i wrote this:
http://www.crashcourse.ca/wiki/index.php/BeagleBoard
if you follow what's there on your f11 system, it should just work.
if it doesn't, then i'll fix the page.
rday
p.s. i even have one of these to go with it:
http://focus.ti.com/dlpdmd/docs/dlpdiscovery.tsp?sectionId=60&tabId=2235
in any event, enjoy. i'm just going to make sure that everything
that's supposed to work continues to work under fedora.
--
========================================================================
Robert P. J. Day Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry.
Web page: http://crashcourse.ca
Linked In: http://www.linkedin.com/in/rpjday
Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday
========================================================================
5435
days inactive
5437
days old
15 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
Chitlesh GOORAH -
Rahul Sundaram -
Ralf Corsepius -
Robert L Cochran -
Robert P. J. Day