installing a second gcc on the same machine
 

On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 10:15 AM, Mark Ryden <markryde@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I want to be able to build a kernel module of FC6 on an FC9 machine,
> I build the module on the FC9 machine against an FC6 kernel tree.
> However, when I insmod it, I get an error: it expects it to be built
> agains the gcc version of FC6.
>
> I want to keep the gcc of FC9.
>
> I tried to install the fc6 gcc rpm, with -force, but this seems to
> overwrite the previous version.
>
> My question is: is there a way to install two gcc rpms on the same machine?
>
You can use -i, --badreloc and --relocate (see rpm's man page). With
the proper use of these you'll get the other gcc rpm installed off
in some other directory like /opt/gcc-fc6. This may or may not work
well though depeding on how hard coded the search for various items
are within the gcc package. If it doesn't you'll need to just resort
to building and installing gcc yourself (which is not really that
hard).

If it does work you've got some new problems though. You can't
upgrade gcc now, as that will remove both gcc's. This will mean that
you can either:

upgrade one
reinstall the other.

install the new one
remove the old one

That last one is an "rpm -i" followed by an "rpm -e", and probably can
be reversed.

Cheers...james
> (BTW: there is no compat version for gcc of FC6 in FC9)
>
> Regards,
> Mark
>
> _______________________________________________
> Rpm-list mailing list
> Rpm-list@redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list
>

_______________________________________________
Rpm-list mailing list
Rpm-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list

installing a second gcc on the same machine
 

On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 4:40 PM, James Olin Oden <james.oden@gmail.com> wrote:

On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 10:15 AM, Mark Ryden <markryde@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello,

>

> *I want to be able to build a kernel module of FC6 on an FC9 machine,

> I build the module on the FC9 machine against an FC6 kernel tree.

> However, when I insmod it, I get an error: it expects it to be built

> agains the gcc version of FC6.

>

> I want to keep the gcc of FC9.

>

> I tried to install the fc6 gcc rpm, with -force, but this seems to

> overwrite the previous version.

>

> My question is: is there a way to install two gcc rpms on the same machine?

>

You can use -i, --badreloc and --relocate (see rpm's man page). *With

the proper use of these you'll get the other gcc rpm installed off

in some other directory like /opt/gcc-fc6.*

No, gcc on FC or RHEL is not relocatable, so --relocate doesn't work (as it is written in the rpm's man page).
In this case the best option is to build an "compact-gcc-x.y.z" on FC9, where x.y.z are* the* gcc release of FC6:

look at* an* example SRPMS of compact-gcc in FC* or* RHEL4.

JMHO, YMMV

hth


*

_______________________________________________
Rpm-list mailing list
Rpm-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list

installing a second gcc on the same machine
 

2008/6/11 devzero2000 <pinto.elia@gmail.com>:
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 4:40 PM, James Olin Oden <james.oden@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 10:15 AM, Mark Ryden <markryde@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I want to be able to build a kernel module of FC6 on an FC9 machine,
>> I build the module on the FC9 machine against an FC6 kernel tree.
>> However, when I insmod it, I get an error: it expects it to be built
>> agains the gcc version of FC6.
>>
>> I want to keep the gcc of FC9.
>>
>> I tried to install the fc6 gcc rpm, with -force, but this seems to
>> overwrite the previous version.
>>
>> My question is: is there a way to install two gcc rpms on the same
>> machine?
>>
> You can use -i, --badreloc and --relocate (see rpm's man page). With
> the proper use of these you'll get the other gcc rpm installed off
> in some other directory like /opt/gcc-fc6.
>
> No, gcc on FC or RHEL is not relocatable, so --relocate doesn't work (as it
> is written in the rpm's man page).
> In this case the best option is to build an "compact-gcc-x.y.z" on FC9,
> where x.y.z are the gcc release of FC6:
> look at an example SRPMS of compact-gcc in FC or RHEL4.
>
That is what --badreloc is for....the question of whether a package is
built to be relocatable, and whether it will work when its relocated
is two entirely different questions (and to what degree will it work
or not work, and will that degree meet your needs are some other
questions).

...james

_______________________________________________
Rpm-list mailing list
Rpm-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list

installing a second gcc on the same machine
 

Something as "--badreloc" force someone to think that the rpm package manager is evil
ad i don't think this (look at this http://www.germane-software.com/~ser/Files/Essays/RPM_Hell.html). One thing marked as "--bad" is bad, not sure a normal mode of work. So it is a matter of quality assurace : do to the right think so to have confidence that the package preserve my system integrity ( and my time )


In the same vein, someone think that the package dependency are a nightname and i don't think this: but they think are more simple disabling the dependency, also when they* distributed only binary package - commercial software or so. But it is this a nightmare : it is possible to upgrade the system ? which truly requisite i have on this software ? Sure, it is possibile to do : --ignorearch, --nodeps, ecc. But is it a sane thing to do ? But ok, i am a lazy sysadmin, i like pace of mind : so i like rpm.


I hope you agreed with most of the argument i have described.

Best Regards

On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 6:47 PM, James Olin Oden <james.oden@gmail.com> wrote:

2008/6/11 devzero2000 <pinto.elia@gmail.com>:


>

>

> On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 4:40 PM, James Olin Oden <james.oden@gmail.com>

> wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 10:15 AM, Mark Ryden <markryde@gmail.com> wrote:

>> Hello,

>>

>> *I want to be able to build a kernel module of FC6 on an FC9 machine,

>> I build the module on the FC9 machine against an FC6 kernel tree.

>> However, when I insmod it, I get an error: it expects it to be built

>> agains the gcc version of FC6.

>>

>> I want to keep the gcc of FC9.

>>

>> I tried to install the fc6 gcc rpm, with -force, but this seems to

>> overwrite the previous version.

>>

>> My question is: is there a way to install two gcc rpms on the same

>> machine?

>>

> You can use -i, --badreloc and --relocate (see rpm's man page). *With

> the proper use of these you'll get the other gcc rpm installed off

> in some other directory like /opt/gcc-fc6.

>

> No, gcc on FC or RHEL is not relocatable, so --relocate doesn't work (as it

> is written in the rpm's man page).

> In this case the best option is to build an "compact-gcc-x.y.z" on FC9,

> where x.y.z are *the *gcc release of FC6:

> look at *an *example SRPMS of compact-gcc in FC *or *RHEL4.

>

That is what --badreloc is for....the question of whether a package is

built to be relocatable, and whether it will work when its relocated

is two entirely different questions (and to what degree will it work

or not work, and will that degree meet your needs are some other

questions).



...james



_______________________________________________

Rpm-list mailing list

Rpm-list@redhat.com

https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list



_______________________________________________
Rpm-list mailing list
Rpm-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list

installing a second gcc on the same machine
 

Hi,
Thanks all for your answers !
>If it doesn't you'll need to just resort
>to building and installing gcc yourself (which is not really that
>hard).

I am trying to install and build gcc myself, as this seems the best
option; I downloaded the
gcc src.rpm and ran:
rpm -ivh
and then
rpmbuild -bp --target=x86_64 gcc41.spec (there are many pathces in
this source rpm)

Now, under /usr/src/redhat/BUILD I have a folder named:
gcc-4.1.1-20061011

I navigated there; I should run ./configure, but is there a way I can
know what are the options
for the configure which the gcc on FC6 was compiled with ? There are
really many options and
I am afraid that if I will miss one, the when trying to build my
module with the generated gcc, it will give
errors. (I have access to a machine on which FC6 with this gcc runs;
but is there a way I can know what
are the options gcc was compiled when this gcc rpm was build ? maybe
by some option to
rpmbuild --rebuild??)

regards,
Mark






On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 5:40 PM, James Olin Oden <james.oden@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 10:15 AM, Mark Ryden <markryde@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I want to be able to build a kernel module of FC6 on an FC9 machine,
>> I build the module on the FC9 machine against an FC6 kernel tree.
>> However, when I insmod it, I get an error: it expects it to be built
>> agains the gcc version of FC6.
>>
>> I want to keep the gcc of FC9.
>>
>> I tried to install the fc6 gcc rpm, with -force, but this seems to
>> overwrite the previous version.
>>
>> My question is: is there a way to install two gcc rpms on the same machine?
>>
> You can use -i, --badreloc and --relocate (see rpm's man page). With
> the proper use of these you'll get the other gcc rpm installed off
> in some other directory like /opt/gcc-fc6. This may or may not work
> well though depeding on how hard coded the search for various items
> are within the gcc package. If it doesn't you'll need to just resort
> to building and installing gcc yourself (which is not really that
> hard).
>
> If it does work you've got some new problems though. You can't
> upgrade gcc now, as that will remove both gcc's. This will mean that
> you can either:
>
> upgrade one
> reinstall the other.
>
> install the new one
> remove the old one
>
> That last one is an "rpm -i" followed by an "rpm -e", and probably can
> be reversed.
>
> Cheers...james
>> (BTW: there is no compat version for gcc of FC6 in FC9)
>>
>> Regards,
>> Mark
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Rpm-list mailing list
>> Rpm-list@redhat.com
>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Rpm-list mailing list
> Rpm-list@redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list
>

_______________________________________________
Rpm-list mailing list
Rpm-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list

installing a second gcc on the same machine
 

On Wednesday, 11 June 2008, at 22:47:43 (+0200),
devzero2000 wrote:

> Something as "--badreloc" force someone to think that the rpm
> package manager is evil

The "bad" in "badreloc" refers to the packaging, not the package
manager. It simply means that the packager did not account for such a
relocation being a possibility; this may be intentional or
unintentional.

> ad i don't think this (look at this
> http://www.germane-software.com/~ser/Files/Essays/RPM_Hell.html

While RPM certainly has its flaws, the ignorance displayed in this
essay explains about 95% of the complaints it contains. I could
respond point by point to all the false claims, misunderstandings,
etc. this person wrote, but I can't invest that much time into
something that would probably fall on deaf ears anyway.

But I don't think the name of the option implies that RPM is evil, nor
do I think that the ignorance of some users invalidates the
technology.

Michael

--
Michael Jennings (a.k.a. KainX) http://www.kainx.org/ <mej@kainx.org>
Linux Server/Cluster Admin, LBL.gov Author, Eterm (www.eterm.org)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
"When my time is up, I want to know that I did one thing well: Love
somebody. The rest of this is just an expression of that one
thing." -- Julie Bowen (Aunt Gwen), "Dawson's Creek"

_______________________________________________
Rpm-list mailing list
Rpm-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list

installing a second gcc on the same machine
 

Without dubt, i agreed with your opinion:it could not be otherwise. Perhaps but it is the case to bring back in
this mailing list, that who* discusses mostly in this days and* believes nell' rpm it is*
part in wide part of the rpm5.org team.

But this is carrying beyond
what was asked and it is not help* to who* placed the question in this thread in first place.

Best Regards



Elia





On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 2:41 AM, Michael Jennings <mej@kainx.org> wrote:

On Wednesday, 11 June 2008, at 22:47:43 (+0200),

devzero2000 wrote:



> Something as "--badreloc" force someone to think that the rpm

> package manager is evil



The "bad" in "badreloc" refers to the packaging, not the package

manager. *It simply means that the packager did not account for such a

relocation being a possibility; this may be intentional or

unintentional.



> ad i don't think this (look at this

> http://www.germane-software.com/~ser/Files/Essays/RPM_Hell.html



While RPM certainly has its flaws, the ignorance displayed in this

essay explains about 95% of the complaints it contains. *I could

respond point by point to all the false claims, misunderstandings,

etc. this person wrote, but I can't invest that much time into

something that would probably fall on deaf ears anyway.



But I don't think the name of the option implies that RPM is evil, nor

do I think that the ignorance of some users invalidates the

technology.



Michael



--

Michael Jennings (a.k.a. KainX) *http://www.kainx.org/ *<mej@kainx.org>

Linux Server/Cluster Admin, LBL.gov * * * Author, Eterm (www.eterm.org)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

*"When my time is up, I want to know that I did one thing well: *Love

*somebody. *The rest of this is just an _expression_ of that one

*thing." * * * * * * * * -- Julie Bowen (Aunt Gwen), "Dawson's Creek"



_______________________________________________

Rpm-list mailing list

Rpm-list@redhat.com

https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list



_______________________________________________
Rpm-list mailing list
Rpm-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rpm-list