Bug 160916 - glibc-2.3.4-2.9.src.rpm fails to build with --target i586
glibc-2.3.4-2.9.src.rpm fails to build with --target i586
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4
Classification: Red Hat
Component: glibc (Show other bugs)
All Linux
medium Severity medium
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: Jakub Jelinek
Brian Brock
Depends On:
  Show dependency treegraph
Reported: 2005-06-18 11:25 EDT by Johnny Hughes
Modified: 2007-11-30 17:07 EST (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2005-06-20 08:41:35 EDT
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---

Attachments (Terms of Use)
glibc buildlog with error (58.97 KB, text/plain)
2005-06-18 11:25 EDT, Johnny Hughes
no flags Details
rpm-tmp.81647 (2.14 KB, text/plain)
2005-06-18 11:29 EDT, Johnny Hughes
no flags Details

  None (edit)
Description Johnny Hughes 2005-06-18 11:25:56 EDT
Description of problem: glibc-2.3.4-2.9.src.rpm fails to build with --target i586

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

How reproducible: always

Steps to Reproduce:
1.  Minimal install of RHEL4 from anaconda on an i686 machine.

2.  Install the following extra packages required to build glibc-2.3.4-2.9.src.rpm:

cpp.i386 3.4.3-22.1
glibc-kernheaders.i386 2.4-9.1.87
glibc-headers.i386 2.3.4-2.9
glibc-devel.i386 2.3.4-2.9
gcc.i386 3.4.3-22.1
rpm-build.i386 4.3.3-9_nonptl
gd.i386 2.0.28-4
libpng-devel.i386 2:1.2.7-1
libselinux-devel.i386 1.19.1-7
texinfo.i386 4.7-5
gd-devel.i386 2.0.28-4

3.  rpmbuild --rebuild --target i586 glibc-2.3.4-2.9.src.rpm
Actual results:  Build exits with the following error:

make[2]: Entering directory
mkdir /home/builder/rpmbuild/BUILD/glibc-2.3-20050218T0151/build-i586-linux/elf
dl-open.c: In function `dl_open_worker':
dl-open.c:636: error: syntax error at end of input

Expected results:
Normal build completion

Additional info:
--taget i686 and --target i386 build fine in this configuration.

Tried building as both root and a normal user (named builder).
Comment 1 Johnny Hughes 2005-06-18 11:25:56 EDT
Created attachment 115654 [details]
glibc buildlog with error
Comment 2 Johnny Hughes 2005-06-18 11:29:51 EDT
Created attachment 115655 [details]

This is the /var/tmp/rpm-tmp script that is running when the error occurs.
Comment 3 Jakub Jelinek 2005-06-20 08:41:35 EDT
Only i386 and i686 are supported and tested build targets for IA-32 glibc, with
i586 you are on your own.
E.g. you need to add i586 to most of the places where i686 appears in the
spec file, test it, etc.

If you come up with a tested spec patch (and perhaps other small non-intrusive
patches for the sources), it might be considered, but we are not going to work
on that ourselves.

RHEL4 requires i686+ CPU and even if you install it in an unsupported
configuration (i586) and take care of building your own kernel etc., i586
is covered by the glibc-2*.i386.rpm that newly in RHEL4 provides also NPTL
Comment 4 Aleksandar Milivojevic 2005-06-20 09:24:52 EDT
I remember reading somewhere that i386 build of glibc for Fedora Core 3 was
"hacked" to use i486 instructions for NPTL support (so basically, FC3 i386 glibc
doesn't really work on true Intel 80386 processors).  Does RHEL4 glibc contains
same hacks?

Or is all this just an urban legend?
Comment 5 Jakub Jelinek 2005-06-20 09:32:22 EDT
Well, RHEL4/FC3 glibc-2*.i386 on true i386 CPU will just not support NPTL.
Comment 6 Aleksandar Milivojevic 2005-06-20 09:48:05 EDT
So, this means that if RHEL4 SRPM package is compiled for i386 architecture, it
will have fully working NPTL support when run on an i586 or compatible
processor?  Or are there some "redhat internal" tricks in play here? ;-)
Comment 7 Jakub Jelinek 2005-06-20 09:58:25 EDT
Yes, it means if you install the *.i386.rpm glibc you should have fully working
NPTL on i586 CPU (or i486).
It is not supported configuration for RHEL4, but it is supposed to work
(at least nobody complained that it does not work).

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.