Re: Status of corona?
Christian Joensson <[email protected]> Tue, 16 Mar 2004 17:43:18 +0100
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.aurora.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Tue, Mar 16, 2004 at 05:17:41PM +0100, Christian Joensson wrote: > On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 09:52:54AM -0600, Tom 'spot' Callaway wrote: > > On Tue, 2004-03-09 at 16:02 +0100, Christian Joensson wrote: > > > > > I saw that the corona tree was updated a week ago... I'm thinking of > > > fedora and upgrading to the corona tree... > > > > > > Is the status of corona such that I can upgrade > > > > > > (a) some packages > > > > I think the only answer that qualifies is A. Now the good news... > > > > > I'd like to have glibc-2.3 and gcc-3.3 mainly... > > > > You should be able to get these two package sets in. > > > > > What packages do you suggest that I download and update? > > > > Glibc*.sparc.rpm, nscd*.sparc.rpm, rpm-*.sparc.rpm, popt-*.rpm, and all > > dependencies that it complains about. Then, do gcc-*.sparc.rpm, cpp-*. > > sparc.rpm, libstdc*.sparc.rpm, libgcc*.sparc.rpm, libgcj-*.sparc.rpm, > > libf2c-*.sparc.rpm, libgnat-*.sparc.rpm, and any other dependencies that > > I'm forgetting. > > right, did this on my sparc32 machine first: > > [root@sparky root]# rpm -Uvh glibc-headers-2.3.3-10.sparc.rpm glibc-kernheaders-2.4-8.43sparc.sparc.rpm glibc-2.3.3-10.sparc.rpm glibc-devel-2.3.3-10.sparc.rpm glibc-common-2.3.3-10.sparc.rpm nscd-2.3.3-10.sparc.rpm rpm-4.3-0.10sparc.sparc.rpm rpm-devel-4.3-0.10sparc.sparc.rpm rpm-build-4.3-0.10sparc.sparc.rpm popt-1.9-0.10sparc.sparc.rpm libgcc-3.3.3-2.sparc.rpm binutils-2.14.90.0.8-8.sparc.rpm tzdata-2003d-1.noarch.rpm beecrypt-3.1.0-1.sparc.rpm elfutils-libelf-0.94-2.sparc.rpm libselinux-1.4-9.sparc.rpm > > however, there is a complaint about not being able to run the %post > script, both for libgcc and glibc-common... > > at this point... I can't do much... > > [root@sparky corona-updates]# rpm -Uvh coreutils-5.0-39.sparc.rpm > bash: /bin/rpm: cannot execute binary file oops, is this really what is wanted: [chj@sparky chj]$ file /bin/rpm /bin/rpm: ELF 32-bit MSB executable, SPARC32PLUS, V8+ Required, version 1 (SYSV) , for GNU/Linux 2.2.5, dynamically linked (uses shared libs), stripped [chj@sparky chj]$ I'd rather have it like this (like on my other sun4m system, running a clean Aurora 1.0) [chj@fw chj]$ file /bin/rpm /bin/rpm: ELF 32-bit MSB executable, SPARC, version 1 (SYSV), for GNU/Linux 2.2.5, statically linked, stripped [chj@fw chj]$ I suspect a non-clean build here... > [root@sparky corona-updates]# > > and not even > > [root@sparky corona-updates]# rpm --rebuilddb > bash: /bin/rpm: cannot execute binary file > [root@sparky corona-updates]# > > > > > > Note that the kernel is missing. I still can't get a 2.6 kernel for > > sparc64 that will let me build the 2.6 kernel or glibc when its > > booted. > > hmm, no worries, i was about to say... but I really need the glibc for > 64 bit... and a few more friends, zlib, gmp, gdb... > > hey, do you really *need* a 64-bit 2.6 kernel to build 64 bit? > wouldn't a 2.4 64 bit kernel do at all? Cheers, /ChJ _______________________________________________ Aurora-sparc-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.auroralinux.org/mailman/listinfo/aurora-sparc-devel Aurora FAQ: http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~mas01r/aurorafaq.html