Re: mpich build failure
On Fri, 2007-10-05 at 09:02 -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 04, 2007 at 10:15:19PM -0400, Adam C Powell IV wrote:
> > Greetings,
> >
> > mpich has not been building on ARM for the past month or so, stopping at
> > the C++ static->shared lib linking moment:
> >
> > make --no-print-directory mpi-addons
> > Making a shared library of libmpich.a
> > Successfully linked libmpich.a
> > Making a shared library of libpmpich.a
> > Successfully linked libpmpich.a
> > Making a shared library of libfmpich.a
> > Successfully linked libfmpich.a
> > Making a shared library of libpmpich++.a
> > /usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lstdc++
> > collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
> > Linking libpmpich++.a shared lib failed
> > make[3]: *** [mpichsharelibs] Error 1
> > make[2]: *** [mpi-addons] Error 2
> > make[1]: *** [mpi] Error 2
> > make[1]: Leaving directory `/build/buildd/mpich-1.2.7/image_mpich'
> > make: *** [build-stamp] Error 2
> >
> > The same make command and scripts succeeded through last October
> > (1.2.7-2), but unfortunately I didn't try to build again until last
> > month, so I don't know just when this broke. All of the other arches
> > are succeeding here.
> >
> > Any ideas on what might be different on ARM such that this is failing?
>
> Is libstdc++-dev required on buildd's or should it be listed in the
> dependancies?
>
> Certainly build-essentials depends on g++ which depends on g++-X.X which
> depends on libstdc++X-dev which depends on libstdc++X.
>
> So of libstdc++ is missing then I would think build-essentials is
> missing which I thought was required on all buildds.
>
> Did someone change any of that for sid (since I checked on Etch)?
Thanks. I checked this too, and at least on amd64, this
build-essentials chain holds. libstdc++ should be there...
On Fri, 2007-10-05 at 15:05 +0200, Oystein Viggen wrote:
> The following message is a courtesy copy of an article
> that has been posted to gmane.linux.debian.ports.arm as well.
>
> * [Adam C Powell IV]
>
> > Greetings,
> >
> > mpich has not been building on ARM for the past month or so, stopping at
> > the C++ static->shared lib linking moment:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > Any ideas on what might be different on ARM such that this is failing?
>
> Broken autobuilder chroot?
>
> I tried (roughly) the following procedure on my nslu2 running etch:
>
> 1. install a sid chroot using debootstrap
> 2. install build-essential with deps
> 3. add a regular user (oysteivi)
> 4. # apt-get build-dep mpich
> 5. $ apt-get source mpich
> 6. $ cd mpich-1.2.7 && dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot -b -uc
>
> This attempt at building the source in a fairly pristine chroot resulted
> in what seems like a successful build and the following packages:
>
> libmpich-mpd1.0-dev_1.2.7-4_arm.deb mpe-source_1.2.7-4_all.deb
> libmpich-mpd1.0ldbl_1.2.7-4_arm.deb mpi-doc_1.2.7-4_all.deb
> libmpich-shmem1.0-dev_1.2.7-4_arm.deb mpich-bin_1.2.7-4_arm.deb
> libmpich-shmem1.0ldbl_1.2.7-4_arm.deb mpich-mpd-bin_1.2.7-4_arm.deb
> libmpich1.0-dev_1.2.7-4_arm.deb mpich-shmem-bin_1.2.7-4_arm.deb
> libmpich1.0ldbl_1.2.7-4_arm.deb
>
> No armel trickery was involved. This is plan debian arm. Seems like a
> "works for me".
>
> I'm not nearly a DD, so these packages will get to rot on my disk
> without further distribution unless somebody should express a specific
> interest in them.
Thank you for verifying this, I know it must have taken a while!
Sounds like a problem autobuilder. But then, there are multiple ARM
autobuilders, right? What's the probability that three separate builds
would fail within the last month under these conditions? Are all of the
autobuilders deficient, or did mpich happen to hit the same one multiple
times, or...?
Thanks again for the quick and thorough replies!
-Adam
--
GPG fingerprint: D54D 1AEE B11C CE9B A02B C5DD 526F 01E8 564E E4B6
Engineering consulting using open source tools
http://www.opennovation.com/
Reply to: