2.0.13 binary distribution for Linux

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
5 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

2.0.13 binary distribution for Linux

viveks-octave
Hello Everybody,

I upgraded my linux from RedHat 5.2 a few days ago. I was earlier
using octave version 2.0.9 with RedHat 5.0 perfectly well.

Presently, I have downloaded the following distributions:

octave-2.0.11-i386-next-nextstep3.tar.gz (binary)
octave-2.0.13-i586-pc-linux-gnulibc1.tar.gz (binary)
octave-2.0.14-i586-pc-linux-gnulibc1.tar.gz (source)

I have a file, octave-1.1.1.bin.tar.gz, too, which is the binary distribution
of octave version 2.0.9. (don't know why the file is named '1.1.1'!)

Now, I have the following problems:

1. I won't be able to compile 2.0.14 source distribution for want of disk
space. (Anyway, I will be happy if earlier versions will do.)

2. I don't know whether 'octave-2.0.11-i386-next-nextstep3.tar.gz' suits for my
system (RedHat Linux 5.2). What is meant by next step in the file name
"octave-*-nextstep3.tar.gz"?

I installed this distribution (and also octave-2.0.9), however, octave does not
start up at all. In both cases, the error given is

        'Cannot run binary file ./octave'.
However, the executable file octave-bug seems to run.

3. I have heard of an X window manager by name 'NextStep'. Can this binary
distribution used in RHL 5.2?

4. I installed Octave 2.0.13 from the binary distribution. But, when I give the
command 'octave', it quits after "Segmentation fault (core dumped)".


The following is taken from the file README.Linux:

        ... it crashes with a segmentation fault
        right away, you probably have incompatible versions of
        libc and libg++ installed, or you have a version of the
        dynamic loader, ld.so, that is incompatible with your
        versions of the libraries, or both.

I have checked the README.*, INSTALL.*
files available with the distribution and found that RHL 5.2 contains the
required versions of the supporting packages above.
Assuming that I am content without dynamic loader, are
ld.so, libc, libg++, libstdc++, gcc/ecgs, etc. required at all?
If yes, which versions of these packages are to be installed?

While all these packages are essential for compiling from source, do we need
to have all of them to just install octave from a binary distribution?

I am sorry for a long and probably ambiguous mail after three days of fight
and frustration due to unsuccessful installation. Even octave 2.0.9 which used
to run earlier on RHL 5.0 does not run now on 5.2! :-)))

Please help.

Thanks in advance.

Vivek...
---------------------------------------------------------------------
PS: I found a mail related to 'Seg fault with 2.0.13' in the mail archive.
But, could not get much information. I tried in vain to get the rpm for 2.0.13
as I could not connect to contrib.redhat.com as mentioned in the particular
thread.

Also, the net is too slow for online reading of the archive during the past
few days of my attempt.


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 2.0.13 binary distribution for Linux

Himanshu Gohel-2

Hi Vivek,

-=>1. I won't be able to compile 2.0.14 source distribution for want of
-=>disk space.

Maybe if you just extract the source and compile each directory
one by one and remove the .o files afterwards?  Would that help
to put the whole package together?

-=>2. I don't know whether 'octave-2.0.11-i386-next-nextstep3.tar.gz'
 [...]
-=>3. I have heard of an X window manager by name 'NextStep'. Can this

NeXT Step (perhaps the capitalization will ring a bell?)
is an operating system, so it won't run on your linux box.

Can't help with the segv; hope someone else can.

--
Himanshu Gohel, [hidden email]
WEB URL: http://www.csee.usf.edu/~gohel/
University of South Florida, Tampa, FL.  USA.


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 2.0.13 binary distribution for Linux

Joao Cardoso-8
Himanshu Gohel wrote:
>
> Hi Vivek,
>
> -=>1. I won't be able to compile 2.0.14 source distribution for want of
> -=>disk space.
>
> Maybe if you just extract the source and compile each directory
> one by one and remove the .o files afterwards?  Would that help
> to put the whole package together?

I dont think that this will work, unless the final `make' is issued in
the `src' directory, otherwise the make rules will rebuild everything.
And it can be a pain to cd to all libcruft sub-directories.

I usualy compile without debuging and only with shared libs. This has
big size impact.

CFLAGS=-O2 CXXFLAGS=-O2 FFLAGS=-O2 /.../configure --enable-shared
--disable-static --enable-dl

after compiling, the objdir only has 14Mbytes

bash-2.02# du -ks octave-2.1.13-objdir
14181   octave-2.1.13-objdir

luck,
Joao

--
Joao Cardoso                |   e-mail: [hidden email]
INESC, R. Jose Falcao 110   |   tel: + 351 2 2094322
4050 Porto, Portugal        |   fax: + 351 2 2008487


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 2.0.13 binary distribution for Linux

Thomas Walter-4
In reply to this post by Himanshu Gohel-2
>>>>> "Himanshu" == Himanshu Gohel <[hidden email]> writes:

    Himanshu> Hi Vivek,

    Himanshu> -=>1. I won't be able to compile 2.0.14 source distribution for want of
    Himanshu> -=>disk space.

    Himanshu> Maybe if you just extract the source and compile each directory
    Himanshu> one by one and remove the .o files afterwards?  Would that help
    Himanshu> to put the whole package together?

Another hint if you have less disk space:
do not use '-g' in CFLAGS and/or CXXFGLAGS while compiling.  This does
not write debugging symbols into the object files and its size will be
much smaller !!!

[snip]

Bye
Thomas


--
Platzangst:
Der dauerhafte Zustand eines Luftballons.

----------------------------------------------
Dipl. Phys. Thomas Walter
Inst. f. Physiklische Chemie II
Egerlandstr. 3 Tel.: ++9131-85 27326 / 27330
91058 Erlangen, Germany email: [hidden email]


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 2.0.13 binary distribution for Linux

Vivek Shanmuganathan (95410006-BS)
In reply to this post by Himanshu Gohel-2


On Mon, 17 May 1999, Himanshu Gohel wrote:

> Can't help with the segv; hope someone else can.

As you had suggested, I tried with strace on octave as rooot and as a
normal user and found out the problem. Thanks , I have fixed the problem.

Regards,

Vivek...