[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: New binutils uploaded for experimental (fwd)



On Fri, Sep 03, 1999 at 09:17:09AM -0400, Christopher C Chimelis wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 3 Sep 1999, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> 
> > OK, I feel stupid now.  I tested snapshots periodically and gave up on
> > one check error I could not fix, and I see where it is now (but it's
> > still there).  Probably due to the libtool hack.  Every 'make check'
> > uses the -installed- versions of the shared libraries - or just fails
> > if nothing with the right soname is installed.
> > 
> > spawn /mnt/faur3/home/dan/binutils-2.9.5.0.10/builddir-single/binutils/ar rc
> > tmpdir/artest.a tmpdir/abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz1 tmpdir/abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz2 
> > lt-ar: error in loading shared libraries: libbfd-2.9.5.0.10.so: cannot open shared object file: No such  file or directory
> > lt-ar: error in loading shared libraries: libbfd-2.9.5.0.10.so: cannot open shared object file: No such  file or directory
> > 
> > FAIL: ar long file names
> 
> I've seen this happen only if you build the binaries outside of the source
> tree for some reason (since rules builds it in builddir-single, it fails).
> If you'd like, I'll make a target in rules that'll run a full testsuite
> that's really just for testing purposes.  I should do this anyway, but
> it's not as easy to clean up after (easily solved still).
> 
> Basically, if you just want to run the testsuite, rebuild it by hand for
> now.  By the next revision, I'll have a 'check' target in debian/rules.

Nope, that's not the cause.  It really needs the shared libraries
installed.  Same error if I build in or out of tree.


Dan

/--------------------------------\  /--------------------------------\
|       Daniel Jacobowitz        |__|        SCS Class of 2002       |
|   Debian GNU/Linux Developer    __    Carnegie Mellon University   |
|         dan@debian.org         |  |       dmj+@andrew.cmu.edu      |
\--------------------------------/  \--------------------------------/


Reply to: