[acerbix]

Hello -

Given my limitations (please see https://forums.irixnet.org/thread-4203.html if interested), I can only run Solaris 10u10 or 11.0 on my T5120. So far, I have successfully built 64-bit gcc-13.2 , binutils 2.42, coreutils 9.4 and a few other GNU tools that I find useful. Please let me know if you are interested in these tools - I'll be happy to share either binaries or patched sources (most GNU sources obsolete Solaris 10/11.0 - but that can be reversed pretty easily . While built on a T5120, these should work on any  sun4v/sparc9v1 arch .

Right now I am trying to hack glibc 2.39 : that's a lot harder. If anyone else has successfully done that or is interested in helping out, I'd love to get any combination of advice (other than stop doing it, or why??), patches, change source or binaries.


Please see screenshot of gnu apps  (built from latest sources as of 15-feb-2024)


Hope this helps.

Best regards,

[Raion]

Why would you need coreutils on Solaris? I've never on a UNIX made within the last 25 years needed coreutils or GNU tar or findutils, or GNU awk/sed for a build dependency.

[hamei]

I've never on a UNIX made within the last 25 years needed coreutils or GNU tar

For the tar, I've run into :

At some point (I guess long ago now, everything was "long ago") gnu tar changed default behavior. It totally flocked me up and pissed me off, I forget what it did but would butcher files you were untarring. It was junk.

But some of the halfwits doing open sores packaged their makefiles to depend on this non-standard absurd behavior.

Yes, you could have worked around that but it was easier just to build gtar and use that in those cases.

I probably have this all mixed up because it was a long time ago but yeah, I can see this sort of thing happening. Also, using gmake is a pretty standard requirement for gnu stuff, but he didn't list that.

v11 is more than good enough, why would anyone want a newer version of slow larry ? :-) Actually, 10 was better but there's a few really useful bits in 11, so I also reluctantly went there. Running on the microserver on a ten year old install, and swerving ancient files to the macbook lappy at this very moment :-)

btw, has anyone else noticed that almost no one anywhere mentions the effing operating system level one is required to have, for executables ? I am so sick of downloading program after program after program in a descending scale, just to get to one that actually works on this level of (shitty, substandard) OS X. It's enough to make you hate people. wtf is wrong with them ? Is that so hard to put in the release notes or on the download page ? "Requires 11.75 or higher", that's impossibly technical and difficult for these buffoons ? They don't consider that anyone could be running hardware more than a year old ?

[acerbix]

Why would you need coreutils on Solaris? I've never on a UNIX made within the last 25 years needed coreutils or GNU tar or findutils, or GNU awk/sed for a build dependency.

If you don't delve much into the GNU world, you prolly don't need to. However, newer (i.e. post 2010) GNU source packages seem to depend on coreutil features that are missing from base OS programs. Also - I do like the syntactic sugar that coreutils provide - like cp with -v, tar that auto-uncompresses, more permissive find, egrep/recursive grep, etc. Sure - I can make do without them - but why?

---

I probably have this all mixed up because it was a long time ago but yeah, I can see this sort of thing happening. Also, using gmake is a pretty standard requirement for gnu stuff, but he didn't list that.

GMake is included/listed in the screenshot  

> v11 is more than good enough, why would anyone want a newer version of slow larry ? :-) Actually, 10 was better but there's a few really useful bits in 11, so I also reluctantly went there. Running on the microserver on a ten year old install, and swerving ancient files to the macbook lappy at this very moment :-) btw, has anyone else noticed that almost no one anywhere mentions the effing operating system level one is required to have, for executables ? I am so sick of downloading program after program after program in a descending scale, just to get to one that actually works on this level of (shitty, substandard) OS X. It's enough to make you hate people. wtf is wrong with them ? Is that so hard to put in the release notes or on the download page ? "Requires 11.75 or higher", that's impossibly technical and difficult for these buffoons ? They don't consider that anyone could be running hardware more than a year old ?

For OSX - have you tried homebrew?

[hamei]

For OSX - have you tried homebrew ?

I am entirely too grumpy :-)  All I want is a decent config file so  can config, make and sometimes make install (altho I usually do that manually if possible).

I will refrain from burning your ears off with my feelings about all this ... "stuff" :-)

[acerbix]

I am entirely too grumpy :-)  All I want is a decent config file so  can config, make and sometimes make install (altho I usually do that manually if possible).

I will refrain from burning your ears off with my feelings about all this ... "stuff" :-)

I remember the good old days when the Makefile had all the flags you needed to edit, and make/make install  
Then came config.h - and then the configure scripts, and then autoconf/automake/autoxyz.../pkg-config/.. and the total mess things are right now. If you are not on linux, everything takes days to reverse-engineer, build and  test. 

I feel your pain.

[hamei]

I feel your pain.

Nobody asked me :-) but ... imnsho, a big part of the falloff in interest in personal computing can be raced to this "stuff". The people dong the coding became all wrapped up in playing with their genitalia to the point where they ignored the programs themselves.

It became a case of upgrading the toolkit, keeping "current" with a bunch of stuff that made absolutely no difference to the end product, new icons or new windowframe decorations or a whole new toolkit whoopee ! while the program itself still didn't work, no fixes to known bugs, no functional improvements, crash crash crash but LOOK ! Now you can rebuild everything for the latest version of gtk that's twice as slow and looks worse than what you started with three years ago ! Isn't that great ?!

I just quit entirely. To hell with this. Some of the programs I built for Irix fifteen years ago still don't work. But now they don't even tell you what version of the operating system is required.

How did such a good idea turn out so bad ?

[Shiunbird]

It became a case of upgrading the toolkit, keeping "current" with a bunch of stuff that made absolutely no difference to the end product, new icons or new windowframe decorations or a whole new toolkit whoopee ! while the program itself still didn't work, no fixes to known bugs, no functional improvements, crash crash crash but LOOK ! Now you can rebuild everything for the latest version of gtk that's twice as slow and looks worse than what you started with three years ago ! Isn't that great ?!

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

[stormy]

Hey @acerbix I'd be interested in any software you compile. I have a fairly high spec Sun Ultra60 running the latest Solaris10. I don't play with it much at the moment, but the next time I get it out I wouldn't mind updating some software on it. Perhaps you could set up an ftp with your stuff or share a google drive. Thanks.

[acerbix]

Hey @acerbix I'd be interested in any software you compile. I have a fairly high spec Sun Ultra60 running the latest Solaris10. I don't play with it much at the moment, but the next time I get it out I wouldn't mind updating some software on it. Perhaps you could set up an ftp with your stuff or share a google drive. Thanks.

Please DM me and we can work through this. 

Cheers