[NBLUG/talk] RE: arghh! I HATE it when that happens..

Jim Bianchi jimbo at sonic.net
Mon Jun 9 22:01:01 PDT 2003


Jim Bianchi said:
>>       I'm trying to install xine on my laptop (RH 8.0). So I finally
>> get all the files it wants and untar one, su to root and run
>> ./configure, and it tells me 'checking for gcc ..no. checking for cc
>> .. no. error: no acceptable cc found.'
>>
>>       What do I do now? I know, find, dload and install gcc. Well, what
>> do you want to bet THAT'LL bomb because something ELSE is needed?
>>
>>       Anyway, on disc 3 of the Rh 8.0 install CD set I used there is a
>> file named 'gcc-objc-3.2-7.i386.rpm.' Is that what I want? My system
>> is an i686. I'm really flying blind here, and need some help.

>Generally speaking, older standards for processors will have code that
>works with newer ones. (Intelx86 forward)
>
>386 is like a baseline. Generally speaking, it means that that package
>will work on a 386 or better.
>
>Something that is not so safe:
>Including i686 packages on a system that has libs and a kernel that were
>set to be a 386 or 486.

	Ok, thanks. The kernel on that machine is definitely i686, no
problemo. But when I tried to have a look at my kernel, I found the
/usr/src dir was empty. I googled for the 2.4.18-14 kernel, found
linux-2.4.18-14.tar.gz, dloaded and untarred it to put something into the
/usr/src dir. I've not done anything with it, for I had an awful thought:
Since this was a generic kernel, how do I tell it (and is it necessary to
tell it at all) it should optimize for an i686 when it compiles?

	No biggie, since I didn't have any bloody gcc, I couldn't've
compiled it anyway! ("Get RH 8.0 -- it's idiot proof" <grin>)

	Also, since there can be no kernel config file yet, how do I tell
which options have been selected in my present (working) kernel and which
have not? (I'm not that much of a guru to be able to tell by looking --
heckfire, I don't even know what to look AT.)

>Optimization can be added to compiler to take advantage of special
>features in newer processors, but it is easier for vendors to provide a
>limited number of core packages that are not optimized for each processor
>but compatible with a majority.

>When installing gcc on redhat, they had the gcc packages and another
>package (kgcc for kernel compiles.) I am not sure if RedHat still does
>this.

	Gahhh. Nooooooooooo! Puleeeze tell me it ain't so! (This is nearly
enough to drive me back to Slackware.)

>So, you should be safe in installing the "386" named packages on a 686
>based system with a 686 based kernel. It is not ok to install 686
>packages onto a system that is not 686 and does not have a 686 kernel
>and does not have support libs for 686.

	Now (while I'm awaiting gcc-3.3.tar.gz to finish dloading) I got a
question about libraries: First, how do you install a library? ("Library
Installation for Dummies..") Something tells me there's more to it than
just putting the thing into /usr/lib. Which brings me to, can one just
keep installing libraries -- as long as they're all named differently, I
can't see what it'd hurt, but heyyy..







More information about the talk mailing list