Page 1 of 1

SDK 53.20 install broke on my system

PostPosted: Fri Jan 13, 2012 5:13 pm
by Hypex
I held it off for some reason and decided to update my SDK tonight. I renamed my old SDK drawer to move it out the way. And then installed the new one. All was going fine until it got to some point that rushed past too fast and a console window opened saying MAKELINK failed. I don't know why as a new directory would have been created and there was more than enough space on my SFS partition I keep the SDK on. The installer finished and apart form that all seemed fine.

I ran the startup script. The old one was disabled. And set out to test.

Here my problems begin! I tested a configure script in an ABC shell and it failed saying the C compiler didn't work! I check the log and "as" had failed. I test "as" and "gcc" in an ABC shell. Both fine. I drop back to a standard shell and it's command not found! :-?

Will reboot and test.

Re: SDK 53.20 install broke on my system

PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 2:41 am
by xenic
@Hypex
I installed SDK 53.20 when it was released but tried to install it again to a different location to see if I could confirm the problem. I ran Snoopy (set to only show fails) along with the install and was able to isolate one problem. Makelink fails when it attempts to create a link from SDK:newlib/lib/libc.so to SOBJS:libc.so and then uses an old version of libc.so (file not link) instead. Check your SDK and see if you have the old libc.so instead of a link to the newer one in the SOBJS: directory. Why can't they just put an Amiga standard version string in the sobjs so programs and installers can identify usable sobjs?? I also noticed that SDK:gcc/bin/ppc-amigaos-gcc-4.2.4 is a file and not a link like all the other "ppc-amigaos" files. It's also a different size and date than SDK:gcc/bin/gcc. In older SDKs, both files are the same. The differing gcc files also exist in my original SDK installation.
I'm afraid I really don't like the binary installer. At least with a script driven installer you could examine the script and track down problems. It would at least be nice to get an installation log to see what's going wrong but I don't see any way to get a log from the SDK installer.

PostPosted: Thu Jan 19, 2012 3:27 pm
by Hypex
Thanks xenic. I'm out of town ATM so will check this when I get back. And report my findings back here. :-)

Re: SDK 53.20 install broke on my system

PostPosted: Fri Jan 20, 2012 2:36 pm
by Hypex
xenic wrote:Check your SDK and see if you have the old libc.so instead of a link to the newer one in the SOBJS: directory.


You're right. My SDK libc.so is a file dated 05-Oct-09. My SOBJS:libc.so is a file dated 29-Jun-11. Looks like should replace the older with a link!

xenic wrote:. Why can't they just put an Amiga standard version string in the sobjs so programs and installers can identify usable sobjs??


That would make sense. Perhaps they think it will dusrupt the Unix underpinnings of shared objects?

On Amiga we don't put version numbers in file names. Seems a bit crass compared to a normal library.

xenic wrote: I also noticed that SDK:gcc/bin/ppc-amigaos-gcc-4.2.4 is a file and not a link like all the other "ppc-amigaos" files.


Same here. From 06-Jan-09. :-o

It also differs to ppc-amigaos-gcc.

xenic wrote: It would at least be nice to get an installation log to see what's going wrong but I don't see any way to get a log from the SDK installer.


I agree. I never had a problem like that with the LISP based standard installer. And as kas1e would say there's no chnagelog. ;-)

Re: SDK 53.20 install broke on my system

PostPosted: Sat Jan 21, 2012 12:40 am
by cha05e90
Hypex wrote:That would make sense. Perhaps they think it will dusrupt the Unix underpinnings of shared objects?

On Amiga we don't put version numbers in file names. Seems a bit crass compared to a normal library.


Indeed. On the other hand, just make a shell script or use DOpus4, select all your SOBjs in SObjs: and perform a "version" on them. You'll see that actually quite some sobjs have a more or less proper version string! I stiil didn't get why this isn't recommended somewhere - it's easy to do and I can't imagine it will harm anything.