Hi,
For the daring users ;) http://people.centos.org/tru/devtools-1.1/ enjoy and report
Cheers,
Tru
On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 3:41 PM, Tru Huynh tru@centos.org wrote:
Hi,
For the daring users ;) http://people.centos.org/tru/devtools-1.1/ enjoy and report
Would it be possible to also make i386 builds? The machine that I would be testing on is 32-bit and so I can't test the existing repo. Thanks, Dave
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 08:17:37PM -0700, Dave Johansen wrote:
On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 3:41 PM, Tru Huynh tru@centos.org wrote:
Hi,
For the daring users ;) http://people.centos.org/tru/devtools-1.1/ enjoy and report
Would it be possible to also make i386 builds? The machine that I would be testing on is 32-bit and so I can't test the existing repo.
I am uploading the 32bits build now.
Cheers.
Tru
On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 5:55 AM, Tru Huynh tru@centos.org wrote:
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 08:17:37PM -0700, Dave Johansen wrote:
On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 3:41 PM, Tru Huynh tru@centos.org wrote:
Hi,
For the daring users ;) http://people.centos.org/tru/devtools-1.1/ enjoy and report
Would it be possible to also make i386 builds? The machine that I would be testing on is 32-bit and so I can't test the existing repo.
I am uploading the 32bits build now.
Great. It installed and seems to be working so far. My question is how will the install path differ in the "release" build? And will the libitm and scl-utils also be included in the "release" build?
Thanks, Dave
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 10:19:39PM -0700, Dave Johansen wrote: ...
Great. It installed and seems to be working so far. My question is how will the install path differ in the "release" build? And will the libitm and scl-utils also be included in the "release" build?
The release build will contains the same packages, but generated from our centos infra, not from my dev. box.
Cheers,
Tru
On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 1:11 AM, Tru Huynh tru@centos.org wrote:
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 10:19:39PM -0700, Dave Johansen wrote: ...
Great. It installed and seems to be working so far. My question is how will the install path differ in the "release" build? And will the libitm and scl-utils also be included in the "release" build?
The release build will contains the same packages, but generated from our centos infra, not from my dev. box.
I just tried installing the update to scl-utils from this repo and got the following error:
Updating : scl-utils-20120613-1.el6.centos.i686 3/6 Error unpacking rpm package scl-utils-20120613-1.el6.centos.i686 error: unpacking of archive failed on file /opt/rh: cpio: rename
...
scl-utils-20120423-2.el6.i686 was supposed to be removed but is not! Verifying : scl-utils-20120423-2.el6.i686 5/6 Verifying : scl-utils-20120613-1.el6.centos.i686 6/6
Updated: java-1.6.0-openjdk.i686 1:1.6.0.0-1.54.1.11.6.el6_3 java-1.7.0-openjdk.i686 1:1.7.0.9-2.3.5.3.el6_3
Failed: scl-utils.i686 0:20120423-2.el6 scl-utils.i686 0:20120613-1.el6.centos
Is there anything that I can do to diagnose the problem?
Thanks, Dave
On Sat, Feb 9, 2013 at 9:23 AM, Dave Johansen davejohansen@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 1:11 AM, Tru Huynh tru@centos.org wrote:
On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 10:19:39PM -0700, Dave Johansen wrote: ...
Great. It installed and seems to be working so far. My question is how will the install path differ in the "release" build? And will the libitm and scl-utils also be included in the "release" build?
The release build will contains the same packages, but generated from our centos infra, not from my dev. box.
I just tried installing the update to scl-utils from this repo and got the following error:
Updating : scl-utils-20120613-1.el6.centos.i686 3/6 Error unpacking rpm package scl-utils-20120613-1.el6.centos.i686 error: unpacking of archive failed on file /opt/rh: cpio: rename
...
scl-utils-20120423-2.el6.i686 was supposed to be removed but is not! Verifying : scl-utils-20120423-2.el6.i686 5/6 Verifying : scl-utils-20120613-1.el6.centos.i686 6/6
Updated: java-1.6.0-openjdk.i686 1:1.6.0.0-1.54.1.11.6.el6_3 java-1.7.0-openjdk.i686 1:1.7.0.9-2.3.5.3.el6_3
Failed: scl-utils.i686 0:20120423-2.el6 scl-utils.i686 0:20120613-1.el6.centos
Is there anything that I can do to diagnose the problem?
Anything I can do to help diagnose the source of this problem and get a fix rolled out so? Thanks, Dave
On 02/25/2013 03:45 AM, Dave Johansen wrote:
Updating : scl-utils-20120613-1.el6.centos.i686 3/6 Error unpacking rpm package scl-utils-20120613-1.el6.centos.i686 error: unpacking of archive failed on file /opt/rh: cpio: rename
...
scl-utils-20120423-2.el6.i686 was supposed to be removed but is not! Verifying : scl-utils-20120423-2.el6.i686 5/6 Verifying : scl-utils-20120613-1.el6.centos.i686 6/6
Updated: java-1.6.0-openjdk.i686 1:1.6.0.0-1.54.1.11.6.el6_3 java-1.7.0-openjdk.i686 1:1.7.0.9-2.3.5.3.el6_3
Failed: scl-utils.i686 0:20120423-2.el6 scl-utils.i686 0:20120613-1.el6.centos
Is there anything that I can do to diagnose the problem?
Anything I can do to help diagnose the source of this problem and get a fix rolled out so?
that error looks like rpm failing due to a machine specific change at your end. Does a rpm -V scl-utils complete without issue ?
On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 1:03 AM, Karanbir Singh mail-lists@karan.org wrote:
On 02/25/2013 03:45 AM, Dave Johansen wrote:
Updating : scl-utils-20120613-1.el6.centos.i686 3/6 Error unpacking rpm package scl-utils-20120613-1.el6.centos.i686 error: unpacking of archive failed on file /opt/rh: cpio: rename
...
scl-utils-20120423-2.el6.i686 was supposed to be removed but is not! Verifying : scl-utils-20120423-2.el6.i686 5/6 Verifying : scl-utils-20120613-1.el6.centos.i686 6/6
Updated: java-1.6.0-openjdk.i686 1:1.6.0.0-1.54.1.11.6.el6_3 java-1.7.0-openjdk.i686 1:1.7.0.9-2.3.5.3.el6_3
Failed: scl-utils.i686 0:20120423-2.el6 scl-utils.i686 0:20120613-1.el6.centos
Is there anything that I can do to diagnose the problem?
Anything I can do to help diagnose the source of this problem and get a fix rolled out so?
that error looks like rpm failing due to a machine specific change at your end. Does a rpm -V scl-utils complete without issue ?
I ran the command and it returned without any output, so I'm guessing that's what is meant by "without issue". Anything else I can or should try? Thanks, Dave
On 02/26/2013 02:39 AM, Dave Johansen wrote:
that error looks like rpm failing due to a machine specific change at your end. Does a rpm -V scl-utils complete without issue ?
I ran the command and it returned without any output, so I'm guessing that's what is meant by "without issue". Anything else I can or should try?
Drop into irc.freenode.net #centos at some point and i am sure someone will work through the issue with you to/fro on email might not be the best idea :D
- KB
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 7:31 AM, Karanbir Singh mail-lists@karan.org wrote:
On 02/26/2013 02:39 AM, Dave Johansen wrote:
that error looks like rpm failing due to a machine specific change at your end. Does a rpm -V scl-utils complete without issue ?
I ran the command and it returned without any output, so I'm guessing that's what is meant by "without issue". Anything else I can or should try?
Drop into irc.freenode.net #centos at some point and i am sure someone will work through the issue with you to/fro on email might not be the best idea :D
I was just on the IRC and because of the recent update to 6.4 through the CR there was actually a newer version of scl-utils that ended up being installed. After a little help on the IRC channel I was able to uninstall the newer scl-utils and install the version from the developer tools that Tru had built without any problems. So I'm not sure what the issue was before, but it appears to be working now.
Thanks for the help, Dave
On 03/08/2013 04:35 AM, Dave Johansen wrote:
I was just on the IRC and because of the recent update to 6.4 through the CR there was actually a newer version of scl-utils that ended up being installed. After a little help on the IRC channel I was able to uninstall the newer scl-utils and install the version from the developer tools that Tru had built without any problems. So I'm not sure what the issue was before, but it appears to be working now.
Excellent, however this means there is a problem with the devtools scl not working well with 6.4 ( which is now released and the current CentOS-6 ). If we can verify this, then its worth a note in the ReleaseNotes
On Sat, Mar 09, 2013 at 02:13:46AM +0000, Karanbir Singh wrote:
On 03/08/2013 04:35 AM, Dave Johansen wrote:
I was just on the IRC and because of the recent update to 6.4 through the CR there was actually a newer version of scl-utils that ended up being installed. After a little help on the IRC channel I was able to uninstall the newer scl-utils and install the version from the developer tools that Tru had built without any problems. So I'm not sure what the issue was before, but it appears to be working now.
Excellent, however this means there is a problem with the devtools scl not working well with 6.4 ( which is now released and the current CentOS-6 ). If we can verify this, then its worth a note in the ReleaseNotes
I have just pushed scl-utils-20120927-2.el6.centos and scl-utils-build-20120927-2.el6.centos that should fix the issue for CentOS-6.4 in my testing area.
Cheers
Tru
On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 3:47 PM, Tru Huynh tru@centos.org wrote:
On Sat, Mar 09, 2013 at 02:13:46AM +0000, Karanbir Singh wrote:
On 03/08/2013 04:35 AM, Dave Johansen wrote:
I was just on the IRC and because of the recent update to 6.4 through the CR there was actually a newer version of scl-utils that ended up being installed. After a little help on the IRC channel I was able to uninstall the newer scl-utils and install the version from the developer tools that Tru had built without any problems. So I'm not sure what the issue was before, but it appears to be working now.
Excellent, however this means there is a problem with the devtools scl not working well with 6.4 ( which is now released and the current CentOS-6 ). If we can verify this, then its worth a note in the ReleaseNotes
I have just pushed scl-utils-20120927-2.el6.centos and scl-utils-build-20120927-2.el6.centos that should fix the issue for CentOS-6.4 in my testing area.
I just noticed that for the 32-bit builds the files are i386 instead of i686 like the rest of the files. Is that going to cause any problems?
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 7:19 PM, Dave Johansen davejohansen@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 3:47 PM, Tru Huynh tru@centos.org wrote:
On Sat, Mar 09, 2013 at 02:13:46AM +0000, Karanbir Singh wrote:
On 03/08/2013 04:35 AM, Dave Johansen wrote:
I was just on the IRC and because of the recent update to 6.4 through the CR there was actually a newer version of scl-utils that ended up being installed. After a little help on the IRC channel I was able to uninstall the newer scl-utils and install the version from the developer tools that Tru had built without any problems. So I'm not sure what the issue was before, but it appears to be working now.
Excellent, however this means there is a problem with the devtools scl not working well with 6.4 ( which is now released and the current CentOS-6 ). If we can verify this, then its worth a note in the ReleaseNotes
I have just pushed scl-utils-20120927-2.el6.centos and scl-utils-build-20120927-2.el6.centos that should fix the issue for CentOS-6.4 in my testing area.
I just noticed that for the 32-bit builds the files are i386 instead of i686 like the rest of the files. Is that going to cause any problems?
I'm writing up a spec file that depends on devtoolset and then sets CXX to /opt/centos/devtoolset-1.1/root/usr/bin/g++ so that it can use the compiler installed by that package. I was just wonder a few things: 1) Is that the "final" path? Or will it change to match the path in RHEL once this development build of it moves to a permanent location? 2) If the answer to #1 is yes, is there a way to distinguish between RHEL and CentOS in the spec file so it can use the appropriate path for each of them?
Thanks, Dave
On Sat, Jun 01, 2013 at 09:26:04PM -0700, Dave Johansen wrote:
I'm writing up a spec file that depends on devtoolset and then sets CXX to /opt/centos/devtoolset-1.1/root/usr/bin/g++ so that it can use the compiler installed by that package. I was just wonder a few things:
- Is that the "final" path? Or will it change to match the path in
RHEL once this development build of it moves to a permanent location?
/opt/rh is currently a link to /opt/centos SL is using /opt/rh
- If the answer to #1 is yes, is there a way to distinguish between
RHEL and CentOS in the spec file so it can use the appropriate path for each of them?
don't bother :)
/opt/rh should work all the time.
BTW, devtools-2 beta has been released but only to Red Hat customers, not yet in the public area.
Cheers,
Tru
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 12:33 AM, Tru Huynh tru@centos.org wrote:
On Sat, Jun 01, 2013 at 09:26:04PM -0700, Dave Johansen wrote:
I'm writing up a spec file that depends on devtoolset and then sets CXX to /opt/centos/devtoolset-1.1/root/usr/bin/g++ so that it can use the compiler installed by that package. I was just wonder a few things:
- Is that the "final" path? Or will it change to match the path in
RHEL once this development build of it moves to a permanent location?
/opt/rh is currently a link to /opt/centos SL is using /opt/rh
OK, cool. I didn't know about the /opt/rh link, so I'll use that.
- If the answer to #1 is yes, is there a way to distinguish between
RHEL and CentOS in the spec file so it can use the appropriate path for each of them?
don't bother :)
/opt/rh should work all the time.
BTW, devtools-2 beta has been released but only to Red Hat customers, not yet in the public area.
Ya, I saw news about that a little bit ago. It's definitely cool that they're making new tools available like that, but in the spec file, is there a way to specify just to use the newer gcc from devtoolset other than just doing CXX=<full path>? Because when the full path has to be specified, then I have to hard code it to a specific version of the devtoolset when in reality I would be fine with using the gcc from devtoolset 1.0, 1.1 or 2.0. Any ideas/suggestions?
Thanks, Dave
On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 9:35 PM, Dave Johansen davejohansen@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 7:31 AM, Karanbir Singh mail-lists@karan.org wrote:
On 02/26/2013 02:39 AM, Dave Johansen wrote:
that error looks like rpm failing due to a machine specific change at your end. Does a rpm -V scl-utils complete without issue ?
I ran the command and it returned without any output, so I'm guessing that's what is meant by "without issue". Anything else I can or should try?
Drop into irc.freenode.net #centos at some point and i am sure someone will work through the issue with you to/fro on email might not be the best idea :D
I was just on the IRC and because of the recent update to 6.4 through the CR there was actually a newer version of scl-utils that ended up being installed. After a little help on the IRC channel I was able to uninstall the newer scl-utils and install the version from the developer tools that Tru had built without any problems. So I'm not sure what the issue was before, but it appears to be working now.
Thanks for the help, Dave
It appears that this is an issue with the main packages and not related to the devtoolset stuff. I just did a clean install of CentOS 6.3 from the LiveCD and then did a "yum update" and it gave me an error when trying to update the scl-utils package. Is there anything I can do to help resolve this issue?
On 01/27/2013 10:41 PM, Tru Huynh wrote:
Hi,
For the daring users ;) http://people.centos.org/tru/devtools-1.1/ enjoy and report
Thanks for doing these Tru.
I wonder if someone wants to take a stab at building hiphop with this stack (ref: https://github.com/facebook/hiphop-php )
- KB
On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 2:40 AM, Karanbir Singh mail-lists@karan.org wrote:
On 01/27/2013 10:41 PM, Tru Huynh wrote:
Hi,
For the daring users ;) http://people.centos.org/tru/devtools-1.1/ enjoy and report
Thanks for doing these Tru.
I wonder if someone wants to take a stab at building hiphop with this stack (ref: https://github.com/facebook/hiphop-php )
I noticed that the gmp-devel package isn't listed as a dependency of devtoolset-1.1-gcc-plugin-devel even thought it appears that it should be. What do I need to do to help get that fixed? Thanks, Dave
Here's the conversation that identified this as the resolution to the issue I ran into: http://www.codesynthesis.com/pipermail/odb-users/2013-February/001026.html
On 02/03/2013 11:25 PM, Dave Johansen wrote:
On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 2:40 AM, Karanbir Singh mail-lists@karan.org wrote:
On 01/27/2013 10:41 PM, Tru Huynh wrote:
Hi,
For the daring users ;) http://people.centos.org/tru/devtools-1.1/ enjoy and report
Thanks for doing these Tru.
I wonder if someone wants to take a stab at building hiphop with this stack (ref: https://github.com/facebook/hiphop-php )
I noticed that the gmp-devel package isn't listed as a dependency of devtoolset-1.1-gcc-plugin-devel even thought it appears that it should be. What do I need to do to help get that fixed? Thanks, Dave
Here's the conversation that identified this as the resolution to the issue I ran into: http://www.codesynthesis.com/pipermail/odb-users/2013-February/001026.html
is there anybody who can tell me how can i build an rpm with devtools in stead of the stock gcc? what should i've to put into the spec file?
On Mon, Feb 04, 2013 at 10:52:01AM +0100, Farkas Levente wrote:
is there anybody who can tell me how can i build an rpm with devtools in stead of the stock gcc? what should i've to put into the spec file?
upstream presentation: http://jnovy.fedorapeople.org/scl-utils/scl.pdf
If your spec file is already set, using devtools should be "easy" according to the documentation :D
cheers.
Tru
On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 2:52 AM, Farkas Levente lfarkas@lfarkas.org wrote:
On 02/03/2013 11:25 PM, Dave Johansen wrote:
On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 2:40 AM, Karanbir Singh mail-lists@karan.org wrote:
On 01/27/2013 10:41 PM, Tru Huynh wrote:
Hi,
For the daring users ;) http://people.centos.org/tru/devtools-1.1/ enjoy and report
Thanks for doing these Tru.
I wonder if someone wants to take a stab at building hiphop with this stack (ref: https://github.com/facebook/hiphop-php )
I noticed that the gmp-devel package isn't listed as a dependency of devtoolset-1.1-gcc-plugin-devel even thought it appears that it should be. What do I need to do to help get that fixed? Thanks, Dave
Here's the conversation that identified this as the resolution to the issue I ran into: http://www.codesynthesis.com/pipermail/odb-users/2013-February/001026.html
is there anybody who can tell me how can i build an rpm with devtools in stead of the stock gcc? what should i've to put into the spec file?
I was planning on doing this as well, but I'm new to the whole spec file thing so this may not be the "best" way to do it, but I was going to set devtoolset as a dependency and then set the CXX path explicitly in the call to ./configure.
If there's a better way than that, then please someone let me know.
Thanks, Dave
On Sun, Feb 03, 2013 at 03:25:09PM -0700, Dave Johansen wrote:
On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 2:40 AM, Karanbir Singh mail-lists@karan.org wrote:
On 01/27/2013 10:41 PM, Tru Huynh wrote:
Hi,
For the daring users ;) http://people.centos.org/tru/devtools-1.1/ enjoy and report
Thanks for doing these Tru.
I wonder if someone wants to take a stab at building hiphop with this stack (ref: https://github.com/facebook/hiphop-php )
I noticed that the gmp-devel package isn't listed as a dependency of devtoolset-1.1-gcc-plugin-devel even thought it appears that it should be. What do I need to do to help get that fixed?
why would gmp/gmp-devel be required? afaik, those packages are not used in the devtools-gcc.
devtools-gcc is built with gmp-4.3.1.
Here's the conversation that identified this as the resolution to the issue I ran into: http://www.codesynthesis.com/pipermail/odb-users/2013-February/001026.html
the basic build works for me (CentOS-6 x86_64) wget http://codesynthesis.com/download/odb/2.1/odb-2.1.1.tar.bz2 http://www.codesynthesis.com/download/libcutl/1.7/libcutl-1.7.0.tar.bz2 tar xjf libcutl-1.7.0.tar.bz2 tar xjf odb-2.1.1.tar.bz2 scl enable devtoolset-1.1 bash (cd libcutl-1.7.0 && ./configure && make -j 8) (cd odb-2.1.1 && ./configure --with-libcutl=../libcutl-1.7.0 && make -j 8)
Cheers,
Tru
Hi Tru,
Tru Huynh tru@centos.org writes:
On Sun, Feb 03, 2013 at 03:25:09PM -0700, Dave Johansen wrote:
I noticed that the gmp-devel package isn't listed as a dependency of devtoolset-1.1-gcc-plugin-devel even thought it appears that it should be. What do I need to do to help get that fixed?
why would gmp/gmp-devel be required? afaik, those packages are not used in the devtools-gcc.
Because some of the headers in the devtoolset-1.1-gcc-plugin-devel package include gmp.h. See, for example, double-int.h.
the basic build works for me (CentOS-6 x86_64)
Probably because you already have gmp-devel installed.
Boris
On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 8:20 AM, Boris Kolpackov boris@codesynthesis.com wrote:
Hi Tru,
Tru Huynh tru@centos.org writes:
On Sun, Feb 03, 2013 at 03:25:09PM -0700, Dave Johansen wrote:
I noticed that the gmp-devel package isn't listed as a dependency of devtoolset-1.1-gcc-plugin-devel even thought it appears that it should be. What do I need to do to help get that fixed?
why would gmp/gmp-devel be required? afaik, those packages are not used in the devtools-gcc.
Because some of the headers in the devtoolset-1.1-gcc-plugin-devel package include gmp.h. See, for example, double-int.h.
the basic build works for me (CentOS-6 x86_64)
Probably because you already have gmp-devel installed.
What is the next step? Should I open a bug on in RedHat's bugzilla documenting the missing dependency?
On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 7:27 AM, Dave Johansen davejohansen@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 8:20 AM, Boris Kolpackov boris@codesynthesis.com wrote:
Hi Tru,
Tru Huynh tru@centos.org writes:
On Sun, Feb 03, 2013 at 03:25:09PM -0700, Dave Johansen wrote:
I noticed that the gmp-devel package isn't listed as a dependency of devtoolset-1.1-gcc-plugin-devel even thought it appears that it should be. What do I need to do to help get that fixed?
why would gmp/gmp-devel be required? afaik, those packages are not used in the devtools-gcc.
Because some of the headers in the devtoolset-1.1-gcc-plugin-devel package include gmp.h. See, for example, double-int.h.
the basic build works for me (CentOS-6 x86_64)
Probably because you already have gmp-devel installed.
What is the next step? Should I open a bug on in RedHat's bugzilla documenting the missing dependency?
I opened a bug for this issue. It can be found at: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=908577