Summary: | Busybox-1.00-r4 fails to compile with GCC 4.1 and Glibc 2.4 | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | Bob <custom_basses> |
Component: | New packages | Assignee: | Embedded Gentoo Team <embedded> |
Status: | RESOLVED WONTFIX | ||
Severity: | normal | CC: | m27315 |
Priority: | High | ||
Version: | 2005.1 | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- |
Description
Bob
2006-03-13 01:16:19 UTC
more bad news: none of the testing branch ebuilds will compile either. busybox is totally blocked with GCC 4.1 and Glibc 2.4. thread: http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-p-3177377.html#3177377 i'm not really interested in fixing stable packages i already fixed this in busybox 1.1.0 perhaps if you would take the time to read the URL that was already posted in this bug report, you would notice that busybox 1.1.0 remains broken. since you didn't bother to read the hyperlink, i guess my only choice is to post the information here, reopen the bug, and ask that you look at the problem again.
thanks.
todland etc # emerge busybox
Calculating dependencies... done!
>>> Emerging (1 of 1) sys-apps/busybox-1.1.0 to /
>>> checksums files ;-) busybox-1.00-r4.ebuild
>>> checksums files ;-) busybox-1.1.0.ebuild
>>> checksums files ;-) busybox-1.01.ebuild
>>> checksums files ;-) files/config-netboot
>>> checksums files ;-) files/digest-busybox-1.00-r4
>>> checksums files ;-) files/digest-busybox-1.01
>>> checksums files ;-) files/digest-busybox-1.1.0
>>> checksums files ;-) files/1.00/bash-tests.patch
>>> checksums files ;-) files/1.00/bb.patch
>>> checksums files ;-) files/1.00/standalone.patch
>>> checksums files ;-) files/1.00/sum.patch
>>> checksums files ;-) files/1.00/cp-posix-opts.patch
>>> checksums files ;-) files/1.00/more-insmod-arches.patch
>>> checksums files ;-) files/1.00/nice.patch
>>> checksums files ;-) files/1.00/busybox-read-timeout.patch
>>> checksums files ;-) files/1.00/fix-amd64-insmod.patch
>>> checksums files ;-) files/1.00/printenv.patch
>>> checksums files ;-) files/1.00/readlink-follow.patch
>>> checksums files ;-) files/1.00/gcc4.patch
>>> checksums files ;-) files/1.1.0/glibc.patch
>>> checksums files ;-) files/1.1.0/ppc64-insmod.patch
>>> checksums files ;-) files/1.1.0/bb.patch
>>> checksums src_uri ;-) busybox-1.1.0.tar.bz2
>>> Unpacking source...
>>> Unpacking busybox-1.1.0.tar.bz2 to /var/tmp/portage/busybox-1.1.0/work
* Applying bb.patch ... [ ok ]
* Applying ppc64-insmod.patch ... [ ok ]
* Applying glibc.patch ... [ ok ]
../../scripts/config/conf.c: In function 'strip':
../../scripts/config/conf.c:41: warning: pointer targets in initialization differ in signedness
../../scripts/config/conf.c:46: warning: pointer targets in passing argument 1 of 'strlen' diff
er in signedness
../../scripts/config/conf.c:47: warning: comparison of distinct pointer types lacks a cast
../../scripts/config/conf.c:51: warning: pointer targets in assignment differ in signedness
* # CONFIG_DMALLOC is not set
* # CONFIG_FEATURE_SUID_CONFIG is not set
* CONFIG_FEATURE_SH_IS_ASH=y
* # CONFIG_FEATURE_SH_IS_NONE is not set
* # CONFIG_STATIC is not set
* # CONFIG_DEBUG is not set
* # CONFIG_SELINUX is not set
* # CONFIG_LOCALE_SUPPORT is not set
* # CONFIG_TFTP is not set
* # CONFIG_FTPGET is not set
* # CONFIG_FTPPUT is not set
* # CONFIG_IPCALC is not set
* # CONFIG_TFTP is not set
* # CONFIG_HUSH is not set
* # CONFIG_LASH is not set
* # CONFIG_MSH is not set
* # CONFIG_INETD is not set
* # CONFIG_DPKG is not set
* # CONFIG_RPM2CPIO is not set
* # CONFIG_RPM is not set
* # CONFIG_FOLD is not set
* # CONFIG_LOGNAME is not set
* # CONFIG_OD is not set
* # CONFIG_CRONTAB is not set
* # CONFIG_UUDECODE is not set
* # CONFIG_UUENCODE is not set
* # CONFIG_SULOGIN is not set
* # CONFIG_DC is not set
touch: setting times of `/var/tmp/portage/busybox-1.1.0/.unpacked': Function not implemented
!!! ERROR: sys-apps/busybox-1.1.0 failed.
Call stack:
ebuild.sh, line 1557: Called dyn_unpack
!!! IO Failure -- Failed 'touch .unpacked' in /var/tmp/portage/busybox-1.1.0
!!! If you need support, post the topmost build error, and the call stack if relevant.
you dont post forum links in bug reports, it isnt helpful plus, there is the fact that the second error you posted is completely unrelated to the original bug report oh, i apologize for exercising such poor form in notifiying you in a busybox 1.00-r4 bug report here that your referenced bugfix for busybox-1.1.0 doesn't work. i had hoped to spare you the inconvenience of dealing with a separate bug report, but now that its evident that you're unwilling to recognize a problem in busybox-1.1.0 without having it separately reported in its own bug report, i will appease you and open a new bug. see bug 126096 (In reply to comment #4) > you dont post forum links in bug reports, it isnt helpful the URL field is provided in Bugzilla so that the user submitting a bug may provide a link to any information that they consider relevant to the bug report. although you may not like it, posting hyperlinks to the forum threads that provide additional relevant information is an accepted practice. hyperlinks are useful to anyone who takes the time to be willing to read them. you're right though -- they're totally useless to the person who is unwilling to follow them. so i have to ask -- why did you edit this bug report to remove the hyperlink that i provided to the relevant information? you're free not to read the pertinent information if you don't want to read it, but i'm at a loss to understand why you have elected to censor my post by removing the following hyperlink: http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-p-3177377.html#3177377 is there something in the information that i've posted there that you find embarassing? forums are a mess to read, end of story ... asking devs to read through a tangled mess of posts to try and find a bug is ridiculous and a waste of time ... you post *all* relevant information into the bug report itself and i could care less if people go and read my posts for what its worth, the link takes the reader directly to the exact post that contains the bug information, and does not send the reader on a wild goose chase. while i can understand your desire not to go on wild goose chase looking for information in the forums, anyone who looks at the exact post that appears upon clicking the hyperlink will see the exact information that is pertinent to the bug report. there is no need to peruse the forums. with your preferences in mind, i won't attempt to save space here by using the link feature that is provided. as you have requested, i will cut and paste all of information and duplicate it here to save your valuable time so that you won't have to lift a finger to click for it. of course, there's still the question of why you chose to remove pertinent information that i had submitted from this bug report. i can't see that there's any defensible excuse for doing that. FWI: SpanKY is a busybox/uclibc developer outside of Gentoo. It wont do you much good to argue with him on these subjects. *** Bug 126559 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** |