Re: [Astlinux-users] Rhino compile problem (0.4 branch)

[Sebastian A. <sp...@sy...>]

Darrick Hartman wrote:
> Sebastian Auriol wrote:
>> Darrick Hartman wrote:
>> 
>>> Sebastian,
>>> 
>>> 1).  even though it should work, currently "make
>>> <package>-clean" then
>>> trying to remake that same package will probably result in errors. 
>>> Some of the packages have interdependancies.  The guaranteed way
>>> which will work is to remove the build_i586 directory.  We are
>>> trying to address this in trunk, but it will not be fixed in the
>>> 0.4 branch. 
>  There are
>>> just too many issues to try to fix them all with our limited
>>> resources. 
>>> 
>> 
>> The only package I have used "make clean" on is the linux package
>> (done from the folder in build_i586). AFAIK this is the only
>> solution in order to get the kernel to re-compile after changing the
>> kernel build options. Please correct me if there is another, better,
>> way. 
>> 
> Several packages require the kernel (linux package) to be
> built first.
> If you remove the kernel, you also need to remove wanpipe, zaptel,
> madwifi ... The only SAFE way to do this is remove the entire
> build_i586 tree.  I apologize for that, but it's the only safe way. 
> If 
> you have a
> reasonably fast processor it shouldn't take more than 30 minutes to
> build the entire thing anyway.

If I remove the kernel I also lose the configuration changes I have made to
it, or should I create a patch with the configuration changes and put it in
the linux package directory? I see you have something in the mk file to
patch the kernal with all .patch files...

Unfortunately it takes several hours to build on my system if I remove the
whole build_i586 tree. Even on another system I use that is a Dual Xeon 3
GHz server it takes a few hours IIRC.

>>> 2).  Kristian and I both built 0.4 from scratch (less the
>>> toolchain) in the last day or so and neither of us had problems.  I
>>> suspect that your problems are related to #1.
>>> 
>> 
>> I am not the only one to have wanpipe not compile on them from last
>> night's svn - Manuel also had this. The iaxmodem problem was after
>> another make after touching some files to make the wanpipe package
>> believe it had been built, so I suppose it could be due to that.
>> 
> I suspect that both you and Manuel are doing the same thing.  I doubt
> the 0.4 branch will ever reach a point where "make
> <package-foo>-clean
> will work as well as we'd like it to.  This is why I've
> stated several
> times that you should remove the build_i586 directory if you are
> changing things in your target packages.

Wanpipe is the first thing to fail after removing the build_i586 tree. This
is before doing any make cleans or any other errors. I'm giving you this
information to help AstLinux - not because I need it to work personally.

>>> 3).  rhino is known not to work.  That's why I have it flagged as
>>> testing/experimental.  They have not released the driver
>>> publicly yet.
>> I don't wish to rude, but why update the rhino package in the stable
>> branch if it was working before and the new version is known not to
>> work?  Can I simply revert to using the old version of the rhino
>> package?  Are there known issues with the older version?  If so,
>> what are they? 
>> 
> The old rhino package was outdated and didn't work with the
> updates to
> zaptel.  It was based on zaptel 1.2.7.  Rhino Equipment supplies the
> download.  Their old download would not work with newer versions of
> zaptel without changing the patch.  We decided that it would
> be better
> for Rhino to provide a proper package that works along the
> same lines as
> the wanpipe package.  What we have partially works, but is also
> partially broken.  Rhino Equipment knows this and is working
> to resolve
> it.  We are making every effort to have this included in
> 0.4.5, but if
> they are unable to get a working package to us, it may not be
> included. We are very grateful to all of the hardware companies that
> are working
> with us to have their drivers included (and therefore their hardware
> supported). 

Thanks for the explanation - this makes sense now.

> I also don't wish to be rude, but you are working on a development
> system.  The final compiled "Astlinux" product works.  It is
> also mostly
> stable which for a 0.4x version of a program is pretty
> reasonable.  If
> we were post 1.0, I can understand your complain.  If you've been
> involved in other projects SVN is a dynamic creature.
> Sometimes changes
> are submitted which temporarily break things.  When we create
> the 0.4.5
> tag, we hope to have some of these issues resolved.
> 
> Perhaps some of this is my fault.  I had referred to 0.4 branch as
> stable.  Compared to trunk it is stable, but it is still a development
> environment.
> 
> Darrick

OK, I understand. But don't take my messages as complaints - they are not:
merely feedback and questions (and, sometimes, thanks). But you did
specifically suggest to me to try the latest version of 0.4 after my hotplug
firmware problem so I have been trying to compile the latest version of
0.4... (And I also would quite like to get these updates anyway.)

Thanks for all your hard work.

Kind regards,

Sebastian