On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 11:58 AM, Ady via Syslinux <syslinux at zytor.com> wrote:> _ I doubt Syslinux can be successfully built in a "pure 64-bit" OS, but > I could be wrong. I have always seen some form of "multilib" or > "lib32-glibc" or similar as a dependency. If you succeed in building > Syslinux in a "pure 64-bit" OS, please let us know.I can confirm, I can build extlinux installer on a pure 64-bit linux system - I'm using custom built LFS without multilib support. Nasm version I was using previously was 2.11.03. While try to upgrade a system I was tried to use latest nasm version and failed. But as was stated, version 2.11.05 is still good for extlinux compilation. Regards, Alexey
Alexey Orishko via Syslinux <syslinux at zytor.com> writes:> On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 11:58 AM, Ady via Syslinux <syslinux at zytor.com> wrote: > >> _ I doubt Syslinux can be successfully built in a "pure 64-bit" OS, but >> I could be wrong. I have always seen some form of "multilib" or >> "lib32-glibc" or similar as a dependency. If you succeed in building >> Syslinux in a "pure 64-bit" OS, please let us know. > > I can confirm, I can build extlinux installer on a pure 64-bit linux > system - I'm using custom built LFS without multilib support. > Nasm version I was using previously was 2.11.03. While try to upgrade > a system I was tried to use latest nasm version and failed. But as was > stated, version 2.11.05 is still good for extlinux compilation.Building the *installers* only from the original tarball does not need NASM at all: $ tar -xf syslinux-6.03.tar.xz $ cd syslinux-6.03 $ ldd bios/extlinux/extlinux linux-gate.so.1 => (0xf777b000) libc.so.6 => /lib32/libc.so.6 (0xf75fb000) /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0xf777e000) $ make NASM=/bin/false bios installer [...] $ ldd bios/extlinux/extlinux linux-vdso.so.1 => (0x00007fff61b06000) libc.so.6 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6 (0x00007f1178fd3000) /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x00007f1179379000) Rebuilding the boot loader itself certainly needs NASM, though. Also, multilib support is only needed for compiling efi32 on a 64-bit OS. "make bios" finishes successfully without it (EFI compilation is broken for 6.03 tarballs anyway). -- Regards, Feri.
On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 8:47 AM, Ferenc Wagner <wferi at niif.hu> wrote:> Building the *installers* only from the original tarball does not need > NASM at all: > > $ tar -xf syslinux-6.03.tar.xz > $ cd syslinux-6.03 > $ ldd bios/extlinux/extlinux > linux-gate.so.1 => (0xf777b000) > libc.so.6 => /lib32/libc.so.6 (0xf75fb000) > /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0xf777e000) > $ make NASM=/bin/false bios installeryes, I can build it. I was using 'make bios' as an intermediate step, but apparently it's not needed for installer.> Rebuilding the boot loader itself certainly needs NASM, though. Also, > multilib support is only needed for compiling efi32 on a 64-bit OS. > "make bios" finishes successfully without it (EFI compilation is broken > for 6.03 tarballs anyway).As I mentioned, I don't have multilib, building pure 64-bit installer. # cd syslinux-6.03 # ldd bios/extlinux/extlinux not a dynamic executable # make bios clean ... # make bios installer ... # ldd bios/extlinux/extlinux linux-vdso.so.1 (0x00007fff53b6d000) libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0x00007f53e53fd000) /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x00007f53e57a0000) # file bios/extlinux/extlinux bios/extlinux/extlinux: ELF 64-bit LSB executable, x86-64, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked, interpreter /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2, for GNU/Linux 2.6.32, not stripped problem solved :-) Thanks for clarification, Alexey