[lfs-support] Adjusting tool chain.

[Paul Rogers]

I'm trying to cross-rebuild one of my older versions of LFS (6.6) for an old i586 box. I'm in trouble. I'm 74+ and this may be my "swan song"--not so long ago I could do this, but now I seem to be stuck in a "Hall of Mirrors" I used to know my way through, unable to "keep all the balls in the air", to mix metaphors.

Anyway, when I finish Ch 5, as becomes apparent when I adjust the toolchain in Ch 6, the /tools/ld SEARCH_DIR has /tools/[host-triplet]. I think it should be the target-triplet. I don't think it would be a problem in the final install, because I don't expect anything that host-triplet to be findable. I've tried starting over, checking everything is as in the book, but it's still the same, and I don't want to waste my time and effort building a broken Ch6! I just did start over and stopped at the end of Ch5 this time.

Any idea what I could've done wrong, or whether it IS safe to proceed?
--
Paul Rogers
***@fastmail.fm
Rogers' Second Law: "Everything you do communicates."
(I do not personally endorse any additions after this line. TANSTAAFL :-)
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posti

[Ken Moffat]

Post by Paul Rogers
I'm trying to cross-rebuild one of my older versions of LFS (6.6) for an old i586 box. I'm in trouble. I'm 74+ and this may be my "swan song"--not so long ago I could do this, but now I seem to be stuck in a "Hall of Mirrors" I used to know my way through, unable to "keep all the balls in the air", to mix metaphors.
Anyway, when I finish Ch 5, as becomes apparent when I adjust the toolchain in Ch 6, the /tools/ld SEARCH_DIR has /tools/[host-triplet]. I think it should be the target-triplet. I don't think it would be a problem in the final install, because I don't expect anything that host-triplet to be findable. I've tried starting over, checking everything is as in the book, but it's still the same, and I don't want to waste my time and effort building a broken Ch6! I just did start over and stopped at the end of Ch5 this time.
Any idea what I could've done wrong, or whether it IS safe to proceed?

Paul,

I think the key point of what you are doing is cross-compiling from
i686 to i586, and most of us have no recent experience of that.
Specifically, for us host and target are the same.

I remember you mentioning about compiling i686 on a newer i686 for
an older one, perhaps something will jog your memory about what you
have done in the past.

My first suggestion is "Try carrying on, see whether the resulting
system builds for i586, and if necessary try installing it to see if
it boots". I was almost going to suggest copying it over to the
i586 and chrooting, but I can just about recall how slow those were.

Failing that, I vaguely remember there was a uname hack for this
sort of thing. Google found:

http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/pipermail/lfs-dev/2001-July/016850.html

(possible issue apparently mentioned in followup, but I failed to
grok that and I'm not sure what the context for the original post
was)

and

http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/pipermail/hints/2003-January/001485.html

but those are both "antique" and who knows if any of it is still
relevant (apart, obviously, from setting -march).

CLFS used to have uname_hack-20080713.tar.bz2, their own links seem
to just go to an old front page but google found the tarball at
http://ftp.osuosl.org/pub/clfs/conglomeration/uname_hack/

From memory it is a kernel module. 2008 is old, but 6.6 was from
2010 so perhaps it might build on that. A file of the same name is
also listed for tinycorelinux with timestamps on other files in
google's result dated 2013 and 2014. I suppose that you have to
modprobe it, and uname will then report whatever the module returns.

ĸen
--
Also Spuke Zerothruster
(Finnegans Wake)
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.or

[Paul Rogers]

Post by Ken Moffat
Paul,

Thanks, Ken. It occurred to me perhaps some medication is making it worse. (In any event, don't get old! It's a bitch watching one's capabilities slip away.) I don't take much, but I had taken some benadryl once last weekend. Never noticed an effect like that before.

Post by Ken Moffat
I think the key point of what you are doing is cross-compiling from
i686 to i586, and most of us have no recent experience of that.

Perhaps not, but we all always build a "contaminated" Stage-1 in Ch5 and in Stage-2 have to adjust the toolchain per Ch6. I can't believe that bit changes much.

Post by Ken Moffat
Specifically, for us host and target are the same.

Yeah, but as you note, building (B)LFS on my i7 for whatever makes it bearable! 233MHz vs 2.93GHz x 8 cores?

Post by Ken Moffat
I remember you mentioning about compiling i686 on a newer i686 for
an older one, perhaps something will jog your memory about what you
have done in the past.

I scriptify it all, and am doing this using the same (B)LFS-6.6 code, but made for an i686 on my i7. So the scripts are right there on my host. I certainly try to fix any recordable glitches in the scripts along the way--part of my process is to make my systems rebuildable like this. I'm not off by much.

I'm not certain I *am* off, just appears that way and I've learned to not overlook warnings.

Post by Ken Moffat
My first suggestion is "Try carrying on, see whether the resulting
system builds for i586, and if necessary try installing it to see if

OK, but I'll stop if I get an i686 triplet for gcc in Ch6! That can't be right.

Post by Ken Moffat
it boots". I was almost going to suggest copying it over to the
i586 and chrooting, but I can just about recall how slow those were.

;-] It has a LFS-6.1 on it. Why not bump it up a bit? This *should have been* a piece of cake!

Post by Ken Moffat
Failing that, I vaguely remember there was a uname hack for this
sort of thing.

Ummm, no, I don't think so. FBBG! That should certainly not be necessary.

Post by Ken Moffat
but those are both "antique" and who knows if any of it is still
relevant (apart, obviously, from setting -march).

I have -CTARGET set in all the configures already.

Post by Ken Moffat
ĸen

Thanks, again. I suppose I'll wait a couple days for the meds to certainly have worn off. Besides, we're crushing grapes tomorrow! Matter of priorities. ;-)
--
Paul Rogers
***@fastmail.fm
Rogers' Second Law: "Everything you do communicates."
(I do not personally endorse any additions after this line. TANSTAAFL :-)
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/w

[Bruce Dubbs]

Post by Paul Rogers
In any event, don't get old!

It's better than the alternative.

-- Bruce
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P

[Paul Rogers]

Post by Bruce Dubbs

Post by Paul Rogers
In any event, don't get old!

It's better than the alternative.
-- Bruce

There's a difference between "getting old" and ageing. Just don't forget: "If I knew I was going to live this long, I'd have taken better care of myself." (Mickey Mantle)

And watch for side effects of all meds!
--
Paul Rogers
***@fastmail.fm
Rogers' Second Law: "Everything you do communicates."
(I do not personally endorse any additions after this line. TANSTAAFL :-)
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/

[Richard Melville]

Post by Paul Rogers

Post by Bruce Dubbs

Post by Paul Rogers
In any event, don't get old!

It's better than the alternative.
-- Bruce

"If I knew I was going to live this long, I'd have taken better care of
myself." (Mickey Mantle)
And watch for side effects of all meds!

Yes, this is getting a little off-topic, but I have to say that the last
time my doctor prescribed me some anti-inflammatory drugs, I looked at the
possible side-effects listed on the back of the packet, and then threw them
in the waste bin.

Richard