LinuxQuestions.org
Visit Jeremy's Blog.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Newbie
User Name
Password
Linux - Newbie This Linux forum is for members that are new to Linux.
Just starting out and have a question? If it is not in the man pages or the how-to's this is the place!

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 01-29-2006, 05:54 PM   #1
Zeno McDohl
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2005
Location: Saratoga, NY
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 317

Rep: Reputation: 30
Updating gclib?


[EDIT] See below posts, I am trying to "uninstall" what I did.


I'm trying to update gclib to 2.3.6 following this tutorial, but got an error when doing the Make.
Code:
cannot set up thread-local storage: set_thread_area failed when setting up thread-local storage

make[2]: *** [/usr/src/glibc-build/sunrpc/xbootparam_prot.stmp] Error 127

Last edited by Zeno McDohl; 02-04-2006 at 04:53 PM.
 
Old 01-30-2006, 07:26 AM   #2
320mb
Senior Member
 
Registered: Nov 2002
Location: pikes peak
Distribution: Slackware, LFS
Posts: 2,577

Rep: Reputation: 48
Quote:
Note that you'll also need the latest stable version of make (at the time of this writing it is 3.80) from here:
did you upgrade the "make" package first as suggested??
Quote:
To build glibc 2.3.x, you'll also need gcc-3.x from here:
and did you upgrade the gcc package as suggested??
 
Old 01-30-2006, 12:35 PM   #3
Zeno McDohl
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2005
Location: Saratoga, NY
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 317

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 30
Yes, Make is the latest stable version already.

Yes, I have gcc 3.x.
 
Old 01-31-2006, 10:48 AM   #4
sundialsvcs
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: SE Tennessee, USA
Distribution: Gentoo, LFS
Posts: 8,455
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 2918Reputation: 2918Reputation: 2918Reputation: 2918Reputation: 2918Reputation: 2918Reputation: 2918Reputation: 2918Reputation: 2918Reputation: 2918Reputation: 2918
Glibc is special. Glibc is different. Attempting to update glibc without knowing what you are doing can render your system inoperable!

Generally, glibc is updated only as part of the process of installing a completely new distribution on the machine, or a completely new release of the same. I advise you to do likewise.

Here's why: of all of the shared libraries on your system, glibc is used by nearly all programs on your system, including ones (like init, or basic commands) without which your system cannot run or cannot be used. If you botch the update, there's no easy way to get back out.

Furthermore, glibc is dependent upon which version of the kernel you are using. If you're running a 2.4 kernel, you can't move to later versions of this library. You have to: upgrade your kernel, boot into it, build the library, bring all of the core-programs forward . . .

That is to say, you have to: install a new version of your distro, following their proscribed installation procedures. Sit back and watch the blinking lights.

Been there... http://www.linuxfromscratch.org... done that... screwed it up once ... okay, make that twice ... finally did it. Don't do it.
 
Old 02-02-2006, 09:23 PM   #5
Zeno McDohl
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2005
Location: Saratoga, NY
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 317

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 30
Wait... So I followed that tutorial up to the make part (which failed)... Should I revert something? Are things changed already, and problems may arise?
 
Old 02-02-2006, 10:40 PM   #6
foo_bar_foo
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,553

Rep: Reputation: 52
that tutorial is old and sucks. (person was lucky if it worked) and the stuff about the headers is odd.
don't follow instructions for the wrong version either.
basically like everyone says fix your headers back like they were and be glad you didn't get to the install part. cause then you machine most likely wouldn't work.
 
Old 02-03-2006, 05:50 AM   #7
Zeno McDohl
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2005
Location: Saratoga, NY
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 317

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 30
Quote:
basically like everyone says fix your headers back like they were
No one had said that...

How do I do that?
 
Old 02-03-2006, 12:54 PM   #8
foo_bar_foo
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,553

Rep: Reputation: 52
that would be to follow the instructions you cited in reverse
to reverse the instructions you followed.
 
Old 02-03-2006, 02:26 PM   #9
Zeno McDohl
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2005
Location: Saratoga, NY
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 317

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 30
I still don't understand. What's the reverse of say, step #2? The reverse of doing a copy? I also don't know how to reverse the ../configure or anything.
 
Old 02-04-2006, 04:43 PM   #10
Zeno McDohl
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2005
Location: Saratoga, NY
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 317

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 30
Anyone? I am a newbie here after all. Telling me to just "reverse the instructions" is a bit vague.
 
Old 02-08-2007, 04:17 AM   #11
blz8
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Oct 2006
Location: CA, USA
Distribution: RH 7.3
Posts: 5

Rep: Reputation: 0
I'm getting the same error on my RH box while trying to build glibc-2.4. I've already updated gcc (4.1.1), binuntils, make, and other prereqs, so I'm good on that.

Code:
# ../glibc-2.4/configure --prefix=/usr/local/glibc2.4 --enable-addons=linuxthreads --without-tls;
I added --without-tls to ./configure and now attempting to comple again, maybe it'll work now... I'll report on that later. (UPDATE... still failed with same message.. should I take out "--enable-addons=linuxthreads" ? UPDATE AGAIN... still no go.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by sundialsvcs
Glibc is special. Glibc is different. Attempting to update glibc without knowing what you are doing can render your system inoperable!

Generally, glibc is updated only as part of the process of installing a completely new distribution on the machine, or a completely new release of the same. I advise you to do likewise.

Here's why: of all of the shared libraries on your system, glibc is used by nearly all programs on your system, including ones (like init, or basic commands) without which your system cannot run or cannot be used. If you botch the update, there's no easy way to get back out.
This is why I'm using --prefix=/usr/local/glibc2.4

I understand this is the safest way without compromising anything (since it's in it's own self contained dir.) Basically parallel glibc.

I'm thinking of leaving gcc 2.96 for compiling things against the old glibc 2.2.5-44 (original from RPM), and dedicating gcc 4.1.1 for the newer compiles using glibc 2.4, if I can get it compiled.

Any comments on that are more than welcome.


Quote:
Been there... http://www.linuxfromscratch.org... done that... screwed it up once ... okay, make that twice ... finally did it. Don't do it.
I just think it's much safer installing it with --prefix

Also, why doesn't anyone ever mention running a new glibc in parallel in replies to questions about upgrding glibc?

Last edited by blz8; 02-08-2007 at 04:42 AM.
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
updating from 10 to 10.1 rmindell Mandriva 1 10-03-2004 09:11 AM
Updating barratt Debian 10 08-02-2004 07:33 AM
Updating QT litrelord Linux - Software 2 07-05-2004 03:47 PM
Updating 8.1 MikeeX Slackware 5 02-07-2003 07:04 PM
problems compilation gclib-2.2.5 wornx Linux From Scratch 1 08-06-2002 10:17 PM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Newbie

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:24 AM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration