21500+ entries in 0.054s
mod6: im about to turn it on myself. lol.
mod6: <+thestringpuller> mod6: make me feel better for likley not being able to see it << just throw it on your mp3 player and start hustlin'
mod6: if we do anything else other than 5.4, that'd probably be good cause otherwise we'll hvae to patch your patch. :]
mod6: yeah, as far as the version number, in hindsight; going forward, we should probably keep all version bumps in it's own patch incase something changes. i.e. your latest IRC Full Demolition Patch.
mod6: yeah i added the tarballs right in website myself... just was curious that i never saw the emails.
mod6: thestringpuller: nice man! yeah, that'll definately be a cool show.
mod6: asciilifeform: hey btw, I don't think that your patches { turdmeister-alert-snip && goodbye-win32 } ever made it into the email list.
mod6: maybe it was planned, but then scrubbed and went straight to 6?
mod6: but yeah, i don't see any release artifact for v0.5.4 or v0.5.5
mod6: it's out of order a bit
mod6: oh yeah there is, nvm, im blind
mod6: I don't see it in "Releases" either, but there isn't a v0.5.3 in there either.
mod6: maybe they never actually created a release out of that? I see no tags for 0.5.4 or 0.5.5
mod6: asciilifeform: ... 0.5.4 shitgnomatic edition existed << that's weird. I did check the bitcoin git tag list, 0.5.4 isn't in there. Where do you see 0.5.4?
mod6: So anyway, we'll have to remember this when we revist the Checkpoints issue. My patch will be rejected then, and we'll come up with something that gets rid of line 939 as well as pulling the checkpoints themselves out of checkpoints.cpp and into a separate config file.
mod6: yeah, line 1099 sets it to true.
mod6: ascii_field: so you're saying you'd like to just git rid of line 939?
mod6: the part you're talking about is in main.cpp right?
mod6: at a later time when we have everything setup for a checkpoint configuration file, then we can revisit.
mod6: ascii_field: re: checkpoints: the patch worked fine to remove checkpoints, but it was tabled for the time being. the main discussion around this was that it could be helpful to hvae checkpoints in there to prevent spamming of blocks from timestamps before a checkpoint.
☟︎ mod6: then i can start over i guess.
mod6: tomorrow i'm going to create a new gentoo AMI with the stage3 from 20150610
mod6: anyway, ran it again, same error. and it looks to me that PIC should be compiled in by default.
mod6: uClibc-0.9.33.2 # grep "DOPIC" .config
mod6: this is what the help screen says for this option ^^
mod6: [*] Generate only Position Independent Code (PIC) (NEW)
mod6: in the menuconfig, this is selected by default:
mod6: although one thing in there allows for usage of arc4random (a note for later maybe) but i left it unselected.
mod6: oh and during a "manual" build, it pops up with a ncurses config screen, i just used the defaults.
mod6: gotta re-run it. just a sc.
mod6: if I add a simple patch file for the -fPIC to /etc/portage/patches/sys-lib/<patchfile> and then emerge uclibc, then it builds, but the outcome is the same of the bitcoind compilation
mod6: but then it doesn't compile.
mod6: it patches cleanly, and then I add -fPIC to the makefile as shown before.
mod6: well, so here's the deal. I can't get it to compile "by hand". meaning, that if i extract the 2 bzip'd files for uclibc: uClibc-0.9.33.2.tar.bz2 & uClibc-0.9.33.2-patches.tar.bz2 and then patch the former with the latter with something like this: for i in `ls ../patch/*.patch | sort` ; do patch -p1 < ../patch/$i ; done
mod6: i got the same error as before asciilifeform. maybe i screwed something up.
mod6: asciilifeform: uClibc built & completed install.
mod6: it's building now...
mod6: think something like this will work?
mod6: ok found it: libuClibc-0.9.33.2.so
mod6: ok we'll take this back to pm
mod6: huh, how do i even figure out what version of uclibc I'm using?
mod6: trinque: you think what i'm looking for (at least the ebuilds for uclibc) are in here? /usr/portage/sys-libs/uclibc?
mod6: i usually do that too.
mod6: trinque: any idea how to do that? (recompile uclibc with a specific flag?)
mod6: makefile (for bitcoin ^)
mod6: ok sure, will post makefile
mod6: yeah exact same message, but i don't see the -fPIC flag in there... maybe im not adding that in there correctly?
mod6: well, and it was with gcc 4.8.4, not 4.5.4 (as it is now)
mod6: maybe im wrong about that.
mod6: last i recall i did this, i got the exact same message...
mod6: HARDENING+=-fPIE -pie -fPIC
mod6: ok with you if i just do like:
mod6: i can add -fPIC in there quick and try again though
mod6: i dunno, i dont have it handy.
mod6: we're still dealing with this error.
mod6: didn't help anything.
mod6: yeah, weeks ago I did try to recompile with -fPIC
mod6: and old version such as 3.4.6-r2 dones't work because no "hardening" such as PIE
mod6: and ben didn't like the idea of using anything >4.8.4
mod6: well, i tried v4.9.2 and that didn't work either.
mod6: this is just v0.5.3.1-RELEASE + { Gentoo Sanity Patches }
mod6 creates new AMI with updated stage3
mod6: guess like we're gonna have to get this patch to work
mod6: ok gcc 4.5.4 is built... trying...