This is the mail archive of the
libc-ports@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the libc-ports project.
Re: Build Error with GLIBC-2.11.1
On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 11:48 AM, Thomas Orgis <sobukus@sourcemage.org> wrote:
> Am Wed, 17 Mar 2010 11:17:29 -0400
> schrieb Matt Turner <mattst88@gmail.com>:
>
>> What's available in the glibc.git and glibc-ports.git trees won't
>> build correctly on alpha without patches. These patches are available
>> in Gentoo and are why sane people use Gentoo on their Alphas.
>
> So you _are_ de factor the current glibc alpha port maintainer and that
> port's upstream is the gentoo repository. I want to point out that in
> the past (I dropped the alpha subject since then for lack of time and
> will) I was able to build glibc 2.10.1 myself with a patchset pulled
> from gentoo (some messup with the headers remains, but I guess that
> could have been helped by using sanitized linux headers).
>
> I just felt like pointing out that it shold be able to build glibc
> manually, independent of distribution, from the upstream source.
> And in this case: Upstream is glibc + glibc-ports + gentoo patches.
> Gentoo seems to be the last bastion of Linux on Alphas. Well, I guess
> I should make an installation on the box I have and then let it rot
> for preserving history...
>
>
> Alrighty then,
>
> Thomas.
Sure, it's possible, but why would you want to?
<impersonal "you">
If you want a supported Linux distribution to use on your Alpha, use
Gentoo. Problem solved.
If you don't want to use Gentoo, then have fun dealing with all the
broken things like glibc. It's all right there in Gentoo, so there's
just no point whatsoever for anyone to help you figure it out.
Beyond that, at this point no matter what distribution you use, you're
going to be compiling your software updates. So why not use Gentoo
where they've already got the kinks worked out of the process?
</impersonal "you">
Matt