From frank.peters at comcast.net  Fri Dec  2 16:07:46 2005
From: frank.peters at comcast.net (Frank Peters)
Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2005 11:07:46 -0500
Subject: [Clc-crux64] CRUX x86_64 package confusion
In-Reply-To: <46E4D8735224B042AA4723B77181080B133BD0@mailtemp.nusystems.com.au>
References: <46E4D8735224B042AA4723B77181080B133BD0@mailtemp.nusystems.com.au>
Message-ID: <20051202110746.05efa68e.frank.peters@comcast.net>

On Mon, 3 Oct 2005 09:45:16 +1000
"Darran Kartaschew" <darran.kartaschew at nusystems.com.au> wrote:

> Hi Guys,
> 
> Just like to ask about the "libstdc++-compat" provided on the ISO. The
> one that I have (that comes with the ISO) appears to be a 32bit package?
> Is that correct? 

Yes.  Just do the command "file libstdc++.(whatever)" to see that
those are 32-bit libraries.

> 
> Is it possible to obtain a 64bit build of this library? (and the others
> included in the libstdc++-compat package)?
>  

You can compile an earlier version of GCC yourself to obtain
the 64-bit libraries.  I believe that GCC-3.3.x contains the
libstdc++.so.5.  (The other libraries are from GCC-2.95.x
which I don't believe will compile on 64-bit architectures.)

You could also use a pre-built 64-bit package from some other
distribution, such as Mandrake.  Just use rpm2targz to extract
any RPM's.  Check out http://rpmfind.net/linux/RPM/ or some
other repository.

I have on my system the 64-bit libstdc++.so.5 that I got
from Mandrake.  If you want me to email that directly to
you, just send a message to the list.

Frank Peters


From lasso at spacecentre.se  Sat Dec  3 16:22:42 2005
From: lasso at spacecentre.se (lasso at spacecentre.se)
Date: Sat, 3 Dec 2005 17:22:42 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [Clc-crux64] CRUX x86_64 package confusion
In-Reply-To:      <46E4D8735224B042AA4723B77181080B133BD0@mailtemp.nusystems.com.au>
References:     <46E4D8735224B042AA4723B77181080B133BD0@mailtemp.nusystems.com.au>
Message-ID: <9145.81.232.52.161.1133626962.squirrel@www.spacecentre.se>

hello

there are ports for the ati-driver, including a libstdc++-compat
from mandrake in the ports collection. unfortunately they are
not really up to date, since i've been lacking time and can't
seem to get mesa3d/libglut to compile properly... but the ports
exists anyway.

cheers,

lars

On Mon, October 3, 2005 12:45 am, Darran Kartaschew wrote:
> Hi Guys,
>
>
> Just like to ask about the "libstdc++-compat" provided on the ISO. The
> one that I have (that comes with the ISO) appears to be a 32bit package? Is
> that correct?
>
> Over the past week or so, I have been trying to get the ATi drivers
> working on my system, and while the settings all appear to be correct the
> driver isn't loading. (even the X log shows it loading and initialising).
> After a bit of troubleshooting, I've found that the ATi
> driver required "libstdc++.so.5". Since a 64bit version doesn't exist on
> the system, the driver won't load...
>
> Is it possible to obtain a 64bit build of this library? (and the others
> included in the libstdc++-compat package)?
>
> Darran
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Clc-crux64 mailing list
> Clc-crux64 at lists.berlios.de
> http://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/clc-crux64
>
>



From lucas at digitillogic.net  Sun Dec 11 10:19:22 2005
From: lucas at digitillogic.net (Lucas Hazel)
Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2005 21:19:22 +1100
Subject: [Clc-crux64] ROX-Filer, RPC and AMD64
Message-ID: <20051211211922.1734f340.lucas@digitillogic.net>

Just found a bug in ROX-Filer that affects AMD64

http://nipul.dynserv.net/lhazel64#rox

For anyone that uses this fine file manager on CRUX64.

-- 
Lucas Hazel <lucas at digitillogic.net>

Digit Illogic Enterises
[http://digitillogic.net/www]
[phone: +61401313870]
[ABN: 52841332786]

AMAC Fast Track Computers
Technician
209 Beardy Street, Armidale NSW
[phone: +61267711287]

School of Maths and Computer Science
University of New England
Armidale, Australia
[http://cs.une.edu.au]

=================================================

"Clothes make the man. Naked men are rarely taken
seriously, or given employment." (Mark Twain)

=================================================


From dstrang at shellpower.net  Sun Dec 18 19:43:41 2005
From: dstrang at shellpower.net (David M. Strang)
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2005 14:43:41 -0500
Subject: [Clc-crux64] CRUX Base64 \ coreutils
Message-ID: <005c01c6040b$59c56d60$c100a8c0@NCNF5131FTH>

The patch file is missing from this port.

# $Id: Pkgfile,v 1.6 2005/11/26 11:51:50 danm Exp $
# Previous packager: Per Lid?n, per at fukt dot bth dot se
# Maintainer: Daniel Mueller, daniel at danm dot de
# Description: A collection of core GNU utilities
# URL: http://www.gnu.org/software/coreutils/

name=coreutils
version=5.93
release=2
source=(ftp://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/$name/$name-$version.tar.bz2 \
 $name-$version.patch)

build() {
    cd $name-$version
    patch -p1 < $SRC/$name-$version.patch
    DEFAULT_POSIX2_VERSION=199209 \
    ./configure --prefix=/usr \
  --mandir=/usr/man \
  --disable-nls \
  --disable-assert
    make
    make DESTDIR=$PKG install
    mkdir $PKG/bin
    mv 
$PKG/usr/bin/{cat,chgrp,chmod,chown,cp,date,dd,df,echo,false,ln,ls,mkdir} 
$PKG/bin
    mv 
$PKG/usr/bin/{mknod,mv,pwd,readlink,rm,rmdir,stty,sync,touch,true,uname} 
$PKG/bin
    rm $PKG/usr/bin/hostname $PKG/usr/man/man1/hostname.1  # conflicts with 
net-tools
    rm $PKG/usr/bin/uptime $PKG/usr/man/man1/uptime.1      # conflicts with 
procps
    rm $PKG/usr/bin/su $PKG/usr/man/man1/su.1              # conflicts with 
shadow
    rm $PKG/usr/bin/groups $PKG/usr/man/man1/groups.1      # conflicts with 
shadow
    rm $PKG/usr/bin/kill $PKG/usr/man/man1/kill.1          # conflicts with 
util-linux
    rm -rf $PKG/usr/share $PKG/usr/lib
}


Is the patch the same as the one on the normal base tree? 
coreutils-5.93-uname.patch?
Thanks!

--David 



From daniel at danm.de  Sun Dec 18 22:19:16 2005
From: daniel at danm.de (Daniel Mueller)
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2005 23:19:16 +0100
Subject: [Clc-crux64] CRUX Base64 \ coreutils
In-Reply-To: <005c01c6040b$59c56d60$c100a8c0@NCNF5131FTH>
References: <005c01c6040b$59c56d60$c100a8c0@NCNF5131FTH>
Message-ID: <200512182319.16935.daniel@danm.de>

On Sunday 18 December 2005 20:43, David M. Strang wrote:
> The patch file is missing from this port.

Fixed, thanks.

bye, danm

-- 
Daniel Mueller
Berlin, Germany         OpenPGP: 1024D/E4F4383A


From dstrang at shellpower.net  Mon Dec 19 00:16:24 2005
From: dstrang at shellpower.net (David M. Strang)
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2005 19:16:24 -0500
Subject: [Clc-crux64] CRUX Base64 \ coreutils
References: <005c01c6040b$59c56d60$c100a8c0@NCNF5131FTH> <200512182319.16935.daniel@danm.de>
Message-ID: <00a501c60431$72b63450$c100a8c0@NCNF5131FTH>

On Sunday 18 December 2005 17:13, Daniel Mueller wrote:
> Fixed, thanks.

Thanks Dan.

It might also be worth noting, that the current mdadm is now 2.2 (released 
Dec 5 2005); and it doesn't appear that the patch is needed for it to 
compile 64bit anymore.

-- David 



From daniel at danm.de  Wed Dec 21 00:03:50 2005
From: daniel at danm.de (Daniel Mueller)
Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2005 01:03:50 +0100
Subject: [Clc-crux64] CRUX64(-danm) and CLC
Message-ID: <200512210103.54746.daniel@danm.de>

Hi,

just for your information:
[1] http://lists.berlios.de/pipermail/clc-devel/2005-December/001198.html

Upcoming changes:

base				->	core
opt/contrib			->	opt
compat32			->	compat32
????				-> 	contrib * [2]

I'm planning to integrate AMD's 64bit glibc-patches and using gcc4 instead of 
gcc3.

Are there any suggestions/"request for enhancements" for the next CRUX64 
release? Matt told me that he compilied all packages _without_ -fPIC - anyone 
who experienced problems with '-fPIC'? What's about the current compat32 
ports? Is the directory layout (/lib64, /lib32, ..) okay for all?

bye, danm

[2] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.distributions.crux.general/36
-- 
Daniel Mueller
Berlin, Germany         OpenPGP: 1024D/E4F4383A
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.crux.nu/pipermail/crux64/attachments/20051221/398dace2/attachment.asc>

From dstrang at shellpower.net  Wed Dec 21 01:47:48 2005
From: dstrang at shellpower.net (David M. Strang)
Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2005 20:47:48 -0500
Subject: [Clc-crux64] CRUX64(-danm) and CLC
References: <200512210103.54746.daniel@danm.de>
Message-ID: <01a001c605d0$8c73bed0$c100a8c0@NCNF5131FTH>

> I'm planning to integrate AMD's 64bit glibc-patches and using gcc4 instead 
> of
> gcc3.

Sounds good. Offbeat question... how horrible of an upgrade will it be from 
gcc3 to gcc4? Or is there no upgrade; is it simply a reload?

-- David 



From lucas at digitillogic.net  Wed Dec 21 02:47:50 2005
From: lucas at digitillogic.net (Lucas Hazel)
Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2005 02:47:50 +0000
Subject: [Clc-crux64] CRUX64(-danm) and CLC
In-Reply-To: <01a001c605d0$8c73bed0$c100a8c0@NCNF5131FTH>
References: <200512210103.54746.daniel@danm.de>
	<01a001c605d0$8c73bed0$c100a8c0@NCNF5131FTH>
Message-ID: <20051221024750.27208561.lucas@digitillogic.net>

On Tue, 20 Dec 2005 20:47:48 -0500
"David M. Strang" <dstrang at shellpower.net> wrote:

> > I'm planning to integrate AMD's 64bit glibc-patches and using gcc4 instead 
> > of
> > gcc3.
> 
> Sounds good. Offbeat question... how horrible of an upgrade will it be from 
> gcc3 to gcc4? Or is there no upgrade; is it simply a reload?
> 

Good timing in my books, I was considering doing a reinstallation on my
amd64 box, now I'll wait for the gcc4 release of crux64.

Regarding -fPIC, I've come across a few applications that won't compile
without it. I've heard that not using it results in a slight
performance increase, but that doesn't bother me. I'd rather my 0.2%
CPU time to be used doing things correctly rather than quickly.

-- 
Lucas Hazel <lucas at digitillogic.net>

=================================================

"Clothes make the man. Naked men are rarely taken
seriously, or given employment." (Mark Twain)

=================================================


From lasso at spacecentre.se  Wed Dec 21 13:38:14 2005
From: lasso at spacecentre.se (lars helmer)
Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2005 14:38:14 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [Clc-crux64] CRUX64(-danm) and CLC
In-Reply-To: <200512210103.54746.daniel@danm.de>
References: <200512210103.54746.daniel@danm.de>
Message-ID: <51446.62.95.121.125.1135172294.squirrel@www.spacecentre.se>

just a thought...

what about skipping /lib /usr/lib altogether? maybe this
is a really bad idea for reasons unknown to me, but what
i am looking for getting rid of any 32-bit libraries ending
up in /lib by mistake (because i am to tired/drunk when
creating the port or whatever). since lib is the default
for 32-bit libraries its easier to spot the mistakes this
way.

what do you think?

cheers,

lars

On Wed, December 21, 2005 1:03 am, Daniel Mueller wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> just for your information: [1]
> http://lists.berlios.de/pipermail/clc-devel/2005-December/001198.html
>
>
> Upcoming changes:
>
>
> base				->	core opt/contrib			->	opt compat32			->	compat32 ????				->
> contrib * [2]
>
> I'm planning to integrate AMD's 64bit glibc-patches and using gcc4
> instead of gcc3.
>
> Are there any suggestions/"request for enhancements" for the next CRUX64
> release? Matt told me that he compilied all packages _without_ -fPIC -
> anyone who experienced problems with '-fPIC'? What's about the current
> compat32 ports? Is the directory layout (/lib64, /lib32, ..) okay for all?
>
>
> bye, danm
>
> [2] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.distributions.crux.general/36
> --
> Daniel Mueller
> Berlin, Germany         OpenPGP: 1024D/E4F4383A
>
>



From lucas at digitillogic.net  Wed Dec 21 14:25:28 2005
From: lucas at digitillogic.net (Lucas Hazel)
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 01:25:28 +1100
Subject: [Clc-crux64] CRUX64(-danm) and CLC
In-Reply-To: <51446.62.95.121.125.1135172294.squirrel@www.spacecentre.se>
References: <200512210103.54746.daniel@danm.de>
	<51446.62.95.121.125.1135172294.squirrel@www.spacecentre.se>
Message-ID: <20051222012528.8cb7655b.lucas@digitillogic.net>

On Wed, 21 Dec 2005 14:38:14 +0100 (CET)
"lars helmer" <lasso at spacecentre.se> wrote:

> just a thought...
> 
> what about skipping /lib /usr/lib altogether? maybe this
> is a really bad idea for reasons unknown to me, but what
> i am looking for getting rid of any 32-bit libraries ending
> up in /lib by mistake (because i am to tired/drunk when
> creating the port or whatever). since lib is the default
> for 32-bit libraries its easier to spot the mistakes this
> way.

Having /lib /usr/lib symliked to /lib64 /usr/lib64 means that for many
ports existing in the original contrib can be installed without
modification. If you're volunteering to port all of contrib then I say
go for it. But then you tend to be drunk when porting so it's probably
not a good idea ;P

-- 
Lucas Hazel <lucas at digitillogic.net>

=================================================

"Clothes make the man. Naked men are rarely taken
seriously, or given employment." (Mark Twain)

=================================================


From lucas at digitillogic.net  Thu Dec 22 11:21:13 2005
From: lucas at digitillogic.net (Lucas Hazel)
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 22:21:13 +1100
Subject: [Clc-crux64] man-pages file conflict
Message-ID: <20051222222113.7e3b906c.lucas@digitillogic.net>

The new man-pages port has man pages for the acl and attr utilities. I
have ports for both these which also provide the same man pages.

You can get my ports for these here:

http://nipul.dynserv.net/lhazel64/acl
http://nipul.dynserv.net/lhazel64/attr

sudo pkgadd -u /usr/pkgmk/man-pages#2.18-1.pkg.tar.gz

usr/man/man2/fgetxattr.2.gz
usr/man/man2/flistxattr.2.gz
usr/man/man2/fremovexattr.2.gz
usr/man/man2/fsetxattr.2.gz
usr/man/man2/getxattr.2.gz
usr/man/man2/lgetxattr.2.gz
usr/man/man2/listxattr.2.gz
usr/man/man2/llistxattr.2.gz
usr/man/man2/lremovexattr.2.gz
usr/man/man2/lsetxattr.2.gz
usr/man/man2/removexattr.2.gz
usr/man/man2/setxattr.2.gz
pkgadd: listed file(s) already installed (use -f to ignore and
overwrite)


From lasso at spacecentre.se  Tue Dec 27 17:43:27 2005
From: lasso at spacecentre.se (lars helmer)
Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2005 18:43:27 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [Clc-crux64] CRUX64(-danm) and CLC
In-Reply-To: <20051222012528.8cb7655b.lucas@digitillogic.net>
References: <200512210103.54746.daniel@danm.de>
    <51446.62.95.121.125.1135172294.squirrel@www.spacecentre.se>
    <20051222012528.8cb7655b.lucas@digitillogic.net>
Message-ID: <6743.81.232.52.161.1135705407.squirrel@www.spacecentre.se>

hello,

merry xmas (war is over) etc...

On Wed, December 21, 2005 3:25 pm, Lucas Hazel wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Dec 2005 14:38:14 +0100 (CET)
> "lars helmer" <lasso at spacecentre.se> wrote:
>
>
>> just a thought...
>>
>> what about skipping /lib /usr/lib altogether? maybe this is a really bad
>> idea for reasons unknown to me, but what i am looking for getting rid of
>> any 32-bit libraries ending up in /lib by mistake (because i am to
>> tired/drunk when creating the port or whatever). since lib is the
>> default for 32-bit libraries its easier to spot the mistakes this way.
>
> Having /lib /usr/lib symliked to /lib64 /usr/lib64 means that for many
> ports existing in the original contrib can be installed without
> modification. If you're volunteering to port all of contrib then I say go
> for it. But then you tend to be drunk when porting so it's probably not a
> good idea ;P

that is a good point, and no, i am not volunteering for the job. but
the "native" crux64 ports afaik installs to lib64 and i know i tend
to modify contrib ports that i install to do the same. moreover, these
modified ports i do volunteer to upload to some contrib64 repo if
there is any interest.

another thing... is there a new version coming up soon-ish?

cheers,

lars

>
> --
> Lucas Hazel <lucas at digitillogic.net>
>
>
> =================================================
>
>
> "Clothes make the man. Naked men are rarely taken
> seriously, or given employment." (Mark Twain)
>
> =================================================
> _______________________________________________
> Clc-crux64 mailing list
> Clc-crux64 at lists.berlios.de
> http://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/clc-crux64
>
>



From daniel at danm.de  Tue Dec 27 17:52:46 2005
From: daniel at danm.de (Daniel Mueller)
Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2005 18:52:46 +0100
Subject: [Clc-crux64] CRUX64(-danm) and CLC
In-Reply-To: <01a001c605d0$8c73bed0$c100a8c0@NCNF5131FTH>
References: <200512210103.54746.daniel@danm.de> <01a001c605d0$8c73bed0$c100a8c0@NCNF5131FTH>
Message-ID: <200512271852.46559.daniel@danm.de>

On Wednesday 21 December 2005 02:47, you wrote:
> Sounds good. Offbeat question... how horrible of an upgrade will it be from
> gcc3 to gcc4? Or is there no upgrade; is it simply a reload?

Some _older_ applications do not compile with gcc4. You need to patch them 
manually. 

I recommend you to save the old /usr/lib/libstdc++.so.6.0.3 library file and 
recompile all major C++ programs installed on your system (qt3,..). Don't 
forget programs with C++-Bindings :-)

bye, danm

-- 
Daniel Mueller
Berlin, Germany         OpenPGP: 1024D/E4F4383A


From daniel at danm.de  Tue Dec 27 17:58:00 2005
From: daniel at danm.de (Daniel Mueller)
Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2005 18:58:00 +0100
Subject: [Clc-crux64] CRUX64(-danm) and CLC
In-Reply-To: <20051221024750.27208561.lucas@digitillogic.net>
References: <200512210103.54746.daniel@danm.de> <01a001c605d0$8c73bed0$c100a8c0@NCNF5131FTH> <20051221024750.27208561.lucas@digitillogic.net>
Message-ID: <200512271858.00732.daniel@danm.de>

On Wednesday 21 December 2005 03:47, Lucas Hazel wrote:
> Regarding -fPIC, I've come across a few applications that won't compile
> without it. I've heard that not using it results in a slight
> performance increase, but that doesn't bother me. I'd rather my 0.2%
> CPU time to be used doing things correctly rather than quickly.

I've heard/read that too. But however, Matt left it out and told me he hasn't 
got any problems so far.

http://dev.gentoo.org/~plasmaroo/devmanual/archs/amd64/

------------snip------------
[..]
On AMD64, this is a necessity, if shared objects aren't built with support for 
position independent code, the build process bails out with an error message 
like this:

foo.o: relocation R_X86_64_32 can not be used when making a shared
object; recompile with -fPIC
[..]
------------snap------------

bye, danm

-- 
Daniel Mueller
Berlin, Germany         OpenPGP: 1024D/E4F4383A


From daniel at danm.de  Tue Dec 27 18:00:19 2005
From: daniel at danm.de (Daniel Mueller)
Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2005 19:00:19 +0100
Subject: [Clc-crux64] CRUX64(-danm) and CLC
In-Reply-To: <20051221024750.27208561.lucas@digitillogic.net>
References: <200512210103.54746.daniel@danm.de> <01a001c605d0$8c73bed0$c100a8c0@NCNF5131FTH> <20051221024750.27208561.lucas@digitillogic.net>
Message-ID: <200512271900.19422.daniel@danm.de>

On Wednesday 21 December 2005 03:47, Lucas Hazel wrote:
> Regarding -fPIC, I've come across a few applications that won't compile
> without it. I've heard that not using it results in a slight
> performance increase, but that doesn't bother me. I'd rather my 0.2%
> CPU time to be used doing things correctly rather than quickly.

-------------------snip---------------------
[..]
Applying -fPIC on all objects will slow down the binaries in a drastic way.
[..]
-------------------snip---------------------

Ehm, maybe I should remove it from /etc/pkgmk.conf.

bye, danm

-- 
Daniel Mueller
Berlin, Germany         OpenPGP: 1024D/E4F4383A


From daniel at danm.de  Tue Dec 27 18:17:15 2005
From: daniel at danm.de (Daniel Mueller)
Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2005 19:17:15 +0100
Subject: [Clc-crux64] CRUX64(-danm) and CLC
In-Reply-To: <20051222012528.8cb7655b.lucas@digitillogic.net>
References: <200512210103.54746.daniel@danm.de> <51446.62.95.121.125.1135172294.squirrel@www.spacecentre.se> <20051222012528.8cb7655b.lucas@digitillogic.net>
Message-ID: <200512271917.15544.daniel@danm.de>

On Wednesday 21 December 2005 15:25, Lucas Hazel wrote:

> Having /lib /usr/lib symliked to /lib64 /usr/lib64 means that for many
> ports existing in the original contrib can be installed without
> modification. If you're volunteering to port all of contrib then I say
> go for it. But then you tend to be drunk when porting so it's probably
> not a good idea ;P

At the moment we're using the same filesystem structure as Gentoo does. I was 
thinking about leaving the 64bit binaries in ../lib64 and putting all 32bit 
stuff back to ../lib (without 32-suffix). But this would make our current 
system completely incompatible to the new one ;-(

As a matter of fact I've left the lib->lib64 symlink because of CRUX's (x86) 
contrib.

bye, danm

-- 
Daniel Mueller
Berlin, Germany         OpenPGP: 1024D/E4F4383A


From daniel at danm.de  Tue Dec 27 18:54:15 2005
From: daniel at danm.de (Daniel Mueller)
Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2005 19:54:15 +0100
Subject: [Clc-crux64] CRUX64(-danm) and CLC
In-Reply-To: <200512210103.54746.daniel@danm.de>
References: <200512210103.54746.daniel@danm.de>
Message-ID: <200512271954.15775.daniel@danm.de>

Some people requested an easier handling of 32bit ports.

The proposal:

- introduce a new variable in Pkgfile called 'arch' or 'pkgarch' 
  (e.g. arch=i386)
- new /etc/pkgmk.conf file which sets the compiler flags depending on
  pkgmk(8)'s new $PKGMK_ARCH var.

An example pkgmk.conf is attached.

bye, danm

-- 
Daniel Mueller
Berlin, Germany         OpenPGP: 1024D/E4F4383A
-------------- next part --------------
#
# /etc/pkgmk.conf: pkgmk(8) configuration
#

case $PKGMK_ARCH in 
i?86)
	# x86
	export CC="gcc -m32"
	export CXX="g++ -m32"
	export AS="as --32"
	export CFLAGS="-O2 -march=i686 -pipe"
	export CXXFLAGS="-O2 -march=i686 -pipe"

	export PKG_CONFIG_PATH=/usr/lib32/pkgconfig
	export FT2_CONFIG=/usr/bin/freetype-config32

	;;
*)
	# x86_64
	export CFLAGS="-O2 -march=x86-64 -pipe"
	export CXXFLAGS="-O2 -march=x86-64 -pipe"

	;;
esac

# PKGMK_SOURCE_DIR="$PWD"
# PKGMK_PACKAGE_DIR="$PWD"
# PKGMK_WORK_DIR="$PWD/work"
# PKGMK_DOWNLOAD="no"
# PKGMK_IGNORE_FOOTPRINT="no"
# PKGMK_NO_STRIP="no"

# End of file

From daniel at danm.de  Tue Dec 27 19:49:59 2005
From: daniel at danm.de (Daniel Mueller)
Date: Tue, 27 Dec 2005 20:49:59 +0100
Subject: [Clc-crux64] man-pages file conflict
In-Reply-To: <20051222222113.7e3b906c.lucas@digitillogic.net>
References: <20051222222113.7e3b906c.lucas@digitillogic.net>
Message-ID: <200512272049.59665.daniel@danm.de>

On Thursday 22 December 2005 12:21, Lucas Hazel wrote:
> [..]
> usr/man/man2/removexattr.2.gz
> usr/man/man2/setxattr.2.gz
> pkgadd: listed file(s) already installed (use -f to ignore and
> overwrite)

Done.

bye, danm

-- 
Daniel Mueller
Berlin, Germany         OpenPGP: 1024D/E4F4383A


From lucas at digitillogic.net  Wed Dec 28 01:50:04 2005
From: lucas at digitillogic.net (Lucas Hazel)
Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2005 01:50:04 +0000
Subject: [Clc-crux64] CRUX64(-danm) and CLC
In-Reply-To: <200512271858.00732.daniel@danm.de>
References: <200512210103.54746.daniel@danm.de>
	<01a001c605d0$8c73bed0$c100a8c0@NCNF5131FTH>
	<20051221024750.27208561.lucas@digitillogic.net>
	<200512271858.00732.daniel@danm.de>
Message-ID: <20051228015004.136f1dc9.lucas@digitillogic.net>

On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 18:58:00 +0100
Daniel Mueller <daniel at danm.de> wrote:

> On AMD64, this is a necessity, if shared objects aren't built with support for 
> position independent code, the build process bails out with an error message 
> like this:
> 
> foo.o: relocation R_X86_64_32 can not be used when making a shared
> object; recompile with -fPIC
> [..]

Yeah, I've hit this error quite a few times. For instance openobex
refuses to build shared libraries, so the satic libraries _must_ be
built with -fPIC.

Speaking of new versions, have you had a chance to play with Tilman's
mod-x repo? I managed to port it to amd64 only encountering a few
problems, but I gave up when I was getting relocation errors when
trying to port the libraries for 32bit compatability. For some reason
it was building x86_64_elf objects despite the usual 32bit environment
varibales, even if using linux32.


From daniel at danm.de  Wed Dec 28 16:24:05 2005
From: daniel at danm.de (Daniel Mueller)
Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2005 17:24:05 +0100
Subject: [Clc-crux64] CRUX64(-danm) and CLC
In-Reply-To: <20051228015004.136f1dc9.lucas@digitillogic.net>
References: <200512210103.54746.daniel@danm.de> <200512271858.00732.daniel@danm.de> <20051228015004.136f1dc9.lucas@digitillogic.net>
Message-ID: <200512281724.05624.daniel@danm.de>

Hey Lucas,

On Wednesday 28 December 2005 02:50, Lucas Hazel wrote:

> Speaking of new versions, have you had a chance to play with Tilman's
> mod-x repo? I managed to port it to amd64 only encountering a few
> problems, but I gave up when I was getting relocation errors when
> trying to port the libraries for 32bit compatability. 

Actually, I haven't even thought of it because I'm not willing to maintain 
>200 ports for X11 (+200 compat32 ports..). 

bye, danm

-- 
Daniel Mueller
Berlin, Germany         OpenPGP: 1024D/E4F4383A