My problem seems rather simple, but I've searched through dozens of pages and still haven't found a sufficient solution.
I use Debian 32-bit with linux 3.13.3 kernel on my VM but there are no linux-headers installed. As you can easily presume I need them badly to test some new module implementation.
First I've tried this:
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/7.5/chapter06/linux-headers.html
but sadly the problem still exists. (i.e. during compilation /lib/modules/linux-3.13.3/build does not exist)
Alternative method is here:
http://www.yourownlinux.com/2014/02/install-upgrade-to-linux-kernel-3-13-3-in-linux.html
and it works great, but the problem is I don't want to change kernel version to linux-3.13.3-031303-generic_3.13.3-031303 I need exactly the 3.13.3 version
Does anyone know where can I find pure 3.13.3 headers?
Additionally, if it's not a big problem, I'd be grateful for the best method to install them.
Edit: I've forgotten to mention the simplest way: obviously, apt-get does not contain packages with linux-headers-3.13.3.
Related
I have a finished program that I would like to distribute to a colleague, and can find no "de-facto" tool chain or resource or guide, or even an opinion, on the best approach to cross-compilation. I know that there is rarely ever a cookie cutter solution, but I am still surprised by the lack of information in this regard.
I have begun trying to cross-compile all of the libraries that I use (and their dependencies) but of course, it is not going smoothly. For reference I decided to go with the basic instructions here. I have followed the instructions exactly as you see them.
Conveniently enough, I needed the png/jpeg/zlib libraries that are used as examples in the link above. I was also able to successfully cross-compile libtiff and leptonica. With that momentum, I then moved on to one of the more beastly libraries -- Tesseract. At this point, during the ./configure .... step, it says that it cannot find leptonica. I don't understand, as the pertinent leptonica files are installed, right where I (and the link above) want them to be. The rub could be rooted in the way that tesseract is built, it differs slightly from the prior libraries I built previously. Tesseract goes autogen.sh -> configure -> make ->make install. I have no idea how to mitigate this.
So my question: Should I continue to bother down this route? The other libraries that I use are openCV, and ImageMagick. If I should, can someone please ease my pain. If I should NOT continue down this route, what is the easiest way to switch to my (very old) windows XP computer, and package up this software? I doubt some of the software I use would even support development on that platform.
I'm starting to work on my master thesis at the moment and I have a (maybe) specific question...
I want to stay on windows OS and run a Linux VM via VirtualBox combined with Vagrant. No Problem. I like the feature to reset the VM via vagrant easily.
The next target is using features like auto-completing or similar while developing in C++. This would help me to work with unknown includes/libraries.
Is it possible to access the filesystem/compiler of the VM while using an IDE (like clion) installed on windows? Without explicit loading of the gui und running the IDE on it? Kinda like working with cygwin? I don't want to use cygwin because it doesn't support c++11 standard (or is there a way???)
Maybe you know an alternative way. I would be glad for all hints solving my problem.
I don't know much about cygwin, though I would be surprised if they cannot get recent versions of gcc. But for certain, you can use MSYS2 to get very recent versions of gcc and many other linux packages, which will support C++11.
It's a matter of opinion how best to do cross-platform development, but an alternative worth mentioning is to use cmake for your project. When you want to code in windows, it can make MSVC 2015 project files for you -- when you want to compile in linux, it can find the dependencies and generate a makefile for you to use. IIUC, cmake is the most widely used cross-platform build system right now, besides gnu make itself. (I'm pretty sure it's more popular than "autotools" nowadays, and its definitely more popular than scons.) The advantage is that you avoid the need to maintain multiple platform-specific project files that essentially say the same thing with different formatting.
I am trying to debug my apps in lazarus on ubuntu 14.04, I searched and made all instructions described at lazarus wiki but when I try to use debugger I am getting dialog about missing syscall-template.s file and whether I want to locate it myself.
Is it some sort of bug or where could I find that file it is asking for?
I am getting dialog about missing syscall-template.s
Probably it is asking about syscall-template.S (which is slightly different from what you said, and small details often matter in programming).
That file is part of GLIBC. You can install GLIBC sources, and locate that file there, but it's not at all interesting, and a better choice for you would be to ignore this file and concentrate on what you are actually trying to debug.
I enjoy developing in Haskell, but am presently confronted with a challenge. At my place of education, I don't have administrative rights on my account. I want to debug/test while there. I need a way to run Haskell code without installing haskell-platform or ghci or anything else requiring of an administrative level of privilege. For instance, a web site which will run haskell code (abeit limited to not include file access of course) or a java utility (or standalone .app, though java is preferred due to the nature of the "parental controls"), or something else I haven't thought of. Source or compiled Java, Flash, and source code in Ruby or Python are preferred to native code. This is on Mac OS X 10.6, for reference.
You can install GHC without admin privileges, but you'll have to build from source. Check out the Building on MacOS X for more details.
Essentially, like any other open-source project, you can compile code and install it, generally, anywhere on your filesystem like into a folder in your home folder (I often use the ~/.local folder for that purpose).
As the linked page mentions, you can also use MacPorts and install it to any place you can write to. Once MacPorts is installed you can install GHC.
EDIT
As pointed out by Carl in the comments below, you don't need to build from source. Just grab the binary tarball from http://www.haskell.org/ghc/download_ghc_7_4_1#binaries.
In addition to all the other ideas, several companies will rent you virtual (cloud) linux servers for a few cents an hour. You have root on those and can install whatever you want, then freeze the image until you need it again.
Normally this might not be advantageous over a local solution if you can make one work, but a possible extra benefit would be that your work can stay on a single "computer" which you could access while sitting in front of any variety of modern PC that might be available to you on a given day.
An alternative not only for Haskell is http://ideone.com/
For the website option, TryHaskell will hardly cut it, it's way to limited.
codepad, OTOH, is more liberal, and should be of more use.
But honestly the bindist option is the best one, clearly!
If you truly can't install anything, then there's
http://tryhaskell.org/ -- like GHCi, but you can't load modules, which means not only that you can't use many standard functions (say, the functions in Data.List), but also that you can't use certain language features (like user-defined algebraic data types).
I also remember a hpaste-style site which executes its code -- and allows you to have private pastes -- but I can't remember it at the moment. Edit: I was thinking of http://codepad.org/ -- thanks #Mog
Try http://hiji.tinyrocket.se/ It is a haskell interpreter written using javascript.
http://ghc.io/ GHC.IO is a version of the Haskell interactive interpreter, ghci, that runs online in a web browser.
You just need to install homebrew, which you can do without root rights if you do so in your home directory. You can then brew install cabal-install
which will automatically install cabal and ghc, or brew install stack to install stack.
There is a web-based interpreter for Haskell at http://tryhaskell.org/. However, it may not provide enough functionality for your requirements.
I've googled the hell out of it, and it seems like there is no way to install gcc on OS X without installing Xcode (which takes at leats 1.5GB of space). All I need is gcc and none of the other junk that comes with Xcode. And at this point, I'll take any other kind of C compiler.
I know I could simply install Xcode, but that is beside the point since I neither have my original installation disc nor a quick internet connection.
So... does anyone have any suggestions?
EDIT: Sorry if I was unclear, but I need the headers as well. I'm currently installing gcc4 via fink and it's downloading the shared libraries as well. I'll update on the progress.
EDIT 2: Ok, so I successfully installed gcc using fink. BUT, it's pretty much useless: "error: C compiler cannot create executables". After googling around, I found that not having Apple's Developer Tools installed is the cause of the error. Probably because I need all the libraries, headers, etc that are only available through Xcode.
Checkout command line tools for Xcode from apple. It's official support from apple to only create the command line tools.
Try the osx-gcc-installer on github.
I've been doing this for a long time, and I've done things like this, and I've concluded it's simply never worth doing. :-(
The reason is that no one expects you to do such things, so there are assumptions all over the system that "everything" is there. You might not run into this today - or worse, you might not even realize later that this is the cause of your issues.
Instead of wasting your smart time on things like this which don't actually produce any working code you can use, following the approved method, run the download overnight, and spend your time instead on planning and writing the top-level code (you shouldn't need a compiler for that anyway!)
I'm fairly certain that this is not possible. However, I'm also not sure if you need the whole developer suite to get the developer tools installed. Quite a few tools get installed along with XCode that might be optional. However, I think you're out of luck for not needing to bite the bullet and use wget or DownThemAll or some other download manager that will let you slowly download the developer tools in chunks.
Whenever I install OS X I install the developer tools as a rule, just because it opens up the world of available software tremendously. Perhaps you should consider doing this in the future as well.
The first thing you want to try is called Pacifist - what Pacifist lets you do is to open a large package (such as XCode) and to access parts of it directly. I'm pretty sure you'll be able to find a smaller package inside the XCode package that just has gcc.
HOWEVER it's not clear to me that this is the best route. If you are planning to do Cocoa or Carbon developing I strongly suggest installing the entire package because you will need all the documentation and headers. If you're only planning on doing command-line stuff, you still may find you need to poke around inside XCode to identify all the packages you will need - things such as libraries, headers, man pages and so on.
All in all you're probably still better off installing the whole thing - if HD space is really tight (because you're on a tiny old iMac for example) then look at tools like Monolingual - Monolingual removes all the international support from all the various OS X applications, which can easily reduce the size of an application by 50%.
There's fink and MacPorts, if you want an easy installer/updater.
Install the GCC package from the Packages directory in Xcode's disk image and you'll have just GCC. Note that of course you won't have autotools or other standard build tools, for which you will have to install more packages from that folder.
I found this googling around that appears to install it without XCode.
install Command Line Tool separately.
refer to
http://osxdaily.com/2014/02/12/install-command-line-tools-mac-os-x
http://osxdaily.com/2012/07/06/install-gcc-without-xcode-in-mac-os-x/
yes i could do it with port but you need at least to accept the code license.