[SOLVED] 5.8, adjusting the toolchain problem

jimmy_page_89 · 11-23-2011, 05:06 PM

I'm building an lfs on Arch Linux
I follow ALL the commands perfectly
but when i adjust the toolchain, readelf does not put on screen anything
because the "requesting program interpreter" is tools/lib/ld-linux.so.2, and NOT /tools/lib/ld-linux.so.2
Can you help me?
The gcc of this Arch is the 4.5.2

druuna · 11-24-2011, 10:41 AM

Hi,

If the first / is missing I suspect a typo somewhere in the previous steps (might even have occured in the previous chapters). Have you redone the commands in the first grey box (chapter 5.8)?

If I look at the system requirements I don't see any problems with using gcc 4.5.2 on your (arch) host.

Although you mention following the book in the above post I have to ask: Did you really? I'm double checking 'cause if I look at your other posts I do see you've been solving problems in a "creative" way (adding to/changing commands and using a newer gcc version)

I do hope you didn't do that this time around....

Can you post the output of the version-check.sh script?

Hope this helps.

jimmy_page_89 · 11-24-2011, 01:57 PM

Hi,
yeah, i haven't made anything of "exotic" now :P
Now i'm going to rebuild again the toolchain (pray for me)

This is the output of version-check.sh

Code:

bash, version 4.1.9(2)-release
/bin/sh -> /bin/bash
Binutils: (GNU Binutils) 2.21.0.20101217
bison (GNU Bison) 2.4.3
/usr/bin/yacc -> /usr/bin/yacc
bzip2,  Version 1.0.6, 6-Sept-2010.
Coreutils:  8.9
diff (GNU diffutils) 3.0
find (GNU findutils) 4.4.2
GNU Awk 3.1.8
/usr/bin/awk -> /bin/gawk
gcc (GCC) 4.5.2
GNU C Library stable release version 2.13
grep (GNU grep) 2.7
gzip 1.4
Linux version 2.6.36-ARCH (tobias@T-POWA-LX) (gcc version 4.5.2 (GCC) ) #1 SMP PREEMPT Mon Jan 24 18:34:55 UTC 2011
m4 (GNU M4) 1.4.15
GNU Make 3.81
patch 2.6.1
Perl version='5.12.2';
GNU sed version 4.2.1
tar (GNU tar) 1.25
Texinfo: makeinfo (GNU texinfo) 4.13
Compilation OK

druuna · 11-24-2011, 02:18 PM

Hi,

Except for one thing the above output looks ok.

There's no output for: xz --version | head -n1
I doubt, but are not 100% sure, that it is relevant for the current problem.

jimmy_page_89 · 11-24-2011, 04:35 PM

LOL, the xz check was not included inside my version-check.sh
the output of xz is

Code:

xz (XZ Utils) 5.0.0

druuna · 11-24-2011, 11:36 PM

Hi,

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimmy_page_89

LOL, the xz check was not included inside my version-check.sh
the output of xz is

Code:

xz (XZ Utils) 5.0.0

xz hasn't been present for too long in LFS, so the logical question: Which LFS version are you building?

The above answers are based on you building LFS 7.0 stable.

jimmy_page_89 · 11-26-2011, 12:34 AM

I'm building the 7.0
But now i mar "solved" this thread
Maybe i wrote something wrong on gcc-pass2 (all that sed-stuff is not easy to write on a IT-keyboard)

druuna · 11-26-2011, 01:59 AM

Hi,

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimmy_page_89

(all that sed-stuff is not easy to write on a IT-keyboard)

I would copy/paste those commands. As long as you understand what's being done and don't just copy/paste the commands and skip the explanatory text there's nothing wrong with that. It will make sure you don't make typo's (especially true for the larger, more complicated commands.

Hope this helps.

Bertical · 11-27-2011, 01:40 AM

It's worth checking the specs file has been modified correctly after adjusting the tool chain as it can save a lot of searching later. Something like :

Code:

lfs:~$ $LFS_TGT-gcc -dumpspecs | diff /mnt/lfs/tools/lib/gcc/i686-lfs-linux-gnu/4.6.1/specs -
18c18
< %{posix:-D_POSIX_SOURCE} %{pthread:-D_REENTRANT} -isystem /tools/include
---
> %{posix:-D_POSIX_SOURCE} %{pthread:-D_REENTRANT}
138c138
< %{muclibc:/tools/lib/ld-uClibc.so.0;:%{mbionic:/system/bin/linker;:/tools/lib/ld-linux.so.2}}
---
> %{muclibc:/lib/ld-uClibc.so.0;:%{mbionic:/system/bin/linker;:/lib/ld-linux.so.2}}

This shows that the overrides for the compilers default cpp header path is now /tools/include and the dynamic linker is going to be from /tools/lib.

jimmy_page_89 · 11-27-2011, 05:29 AM

druuna, thanks for all the assistence

Yep, the problem was a typing-error