rtems-4.6pre5 building first time WITH Ada

[Chris Sparks]

Hi Paul,

>That's odd that you have this problem with RH7 [Ed: Chris has pointed out
>to me that he has RH7] My previous advice assumed you wouldn't
>otherwise need glibc, as there are still quite a few libc5 systems
>around.
>
I double checked and it is RedHat 7.0.  Do you think I need to upgrade?

>What does "ldconfig -p" spits out? (wrt libc)
>
>I'm using RH7.1 and when I run  "ls -l /lib/libc[.-]*" I get
>
>-rwxr-xr-x    2 root     root      5737154 Oct 10  2002 /lib/libc-2.2.4.so
>lrwxrwxrwx    1 root     root           13 Nov 19  2002 /lib/libc.so.6 ->
>libc-2.2.4.so
>
I saw a whole boat load of references to libc6.  When I went to /lib 
(not /usr/lib from the previous email
you sent) I see libc.so.6 which is softlinked to libc-2.1.94.so

>(and then "strings  /lib/libc-2.2.4.so  | grep -i copyright"
>shows that this is in fact the (a?) FSF libc.)
>
Can't do this now my Linux box hosed.  Seems to be doing this 
regularly.  Strange.  Reboot and wait....

Since I don't have 2.2.4 I searched on libc-* and found 2000 as the last 
year listed

>I suspect that the symlink shown above isn't on your system,
>however "rpm -q -f /lib/libc.so.6 " and "rpm -q -f /lib/libc-2.2.4.so"
>both report each file belong to "glibc-2.2.4-3" (which means it
>should be there)
>
The first shows glibc-2.1.94-3 and the second shows nothing.

>So you best bet is probably to re-install  glibc-2.2.4-3 from
>whatever source you got it from. "rpm --install --force glibc-2.2.4-3.rpm"
>
I need to get it then.  Maybe it wasn't a part of RedHat 7.0

>ps - Not to muddy the waters but, I will anyway:
>
>"find /bin -type f -exec ldd {} \; | grep libc"
>shows that just about everything (in bin) depends on libc.so.6 (rather
>than directly on libc-2.2.4) so unless you have basic utilities from
>a different source than I do, it screws up my assumption (again! I've
>got to stop assuming..), as nothing would work. In any case I'd try
>reloading the rpm. Otherwise,  I'd see if you can discern if the gdb
>rpm is looking at the ldconfig cache or a specific fs location to
>determine if libc.so.6 is there.
>
I did that command and got some meaningless stuff (well to me anyway! :-)

Thanks,
Chris