Build Error during Make

[Rudster816]

I just downloaded the Android source from the repo for the first time,
and now when I attempt to make it I get the following error. All the
tools I have are up to date as far as I know, and I followed the guide
here precisely.

http://source.android.com/source/download.html

It looks like im missing a header from somewhere, but I have no idea
on how to fix this.


riley@riley-desktop:~/androidbuild$ make
============================================
PLATFORM_VERSION_CODENAME=AOSP
PLATFORM_VERSION=AOSP
TARGET_PRODUCT=generic
TARGET_BUILD_VARIANT=eng
TARGET_SIMULATOR=
TARGET_BUILD_TYPE=release
TARGET_BUILD_APPS=
TARGET_ARCH=arm
HOST_ARCH=x86
HOST_OS=linux
HOST_BUILD_TYPE=release
BUILD_ID=OPENMASTER
============================================
Install: out/host/linux-x86/framework/apicheck.jar
Install: out/host/linux-x86/framework/clearsilver.jar
Install: out/host/linux-x86/framework/droiddoc.jar
host C: libclearsilver-jni <= external/clearsilver/java-jni/
j_neo_util.c
In file included from /usr/include/features.h:378,
from /usr/include/string.h:26,
from external/clearsilver/java-jni/j_neo_util.c:1:
/usr/include/gnu/stubs.h:9:27: error: gnu/stubs-64.h: No such file or
directory
make: *** [out/host/linux-x86/obj/SHARED_LIBRARIES/libclearsilver-
jni_intermediates/j_neo_util.o] Error 1

[frank.sposaro]

Hi. I have not seen this error for myself, but it looks java related
error along with gcc. Not being able to find the 64 bit stub file
probably means you need to double check how many bits your platform
is. I've read that the new build requires java 1.6 and 64 bit. I know
itusually cried if you have the wrong version of java, but idk if it
checks for 64 if you do have 64 make sure you have the correct
version of gcc

[Ying Wang]

Yes, the build system assumes you are building on a 64-bit host (maybe mistakenly, does other parts enforce a 64-bit environment?).

I can make a fix, however, I can't verify it for I don't have a 32-bit host available.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "Android Building" mailing list.
To post to this group, send email to android-...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
android-buildi...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/android-building?hl=en

[Garret]

Please see

http://groups.google.com/group/android-building/browse_thread/thread/333af6774ddf97a7

[David Lindquist]

From what I can see, this was introduced with:
https://review.source.android.com/15611

Particularly, the diffs here:
https://review.source.android.com/#p...,cs/Android.mk

+# This forces a 64-bit build for Java6
+ifneq ($(filter 1.6%,$(java_version)),)
+ LOCAL_CFLAGS += -m64
+ LOCAL_LDFLAGS += -m64
+endif
+

(Logic: if Java 1.6 is installed, assume that the host is a 64-bit
machine)

Downgrading Java to 1.5 allows compilation to succeed for the generic-
eng / full-eng build. So, I think I can safely say that nothing else
enforces a 64-bit environment. If there was a 64-bit enforcement,
wouldn't it be enforced in build/core/main.mk?

Frank, where did you read that the new build requires a 64-bit host?

On Jul 7, 11:50 am, Ying Wang <wangy...@android.com> wrote:
> Yes, the build system assumes you are building on a 64-bit host (maybe
> mistakenly, does other parts enforce a 64-bit environment?).
> I can make a fix, however, I can't verify it for I don't have a 32-bit host
> available.
>

> > android-buildi...@googlegroups.com<android-building%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>

[David Lindquist]

On Jul 7, 11:50 am, Ying Wang <wangy...@android.com> wrote:

> Yes, the build system assumes you are building on a 64-bit host (maybe
> mistakenly, does other parts enforce a 64-bit environment?).
> I can make a fix, however, I can't verify it for I don't have a 32-bit host
> available.

I'd be happy to verify with a 32-bit host.

[Ying Wang]

Joe said that the build now requires a 64 bit environment.
So maybe we have to stop supporting 32-bit build environment since
Java6?

> > > android-buildi...@googlegroups.com<android-building%2Bunsubscrib e...@googlegroups.com>

[Manfred Moser]

Sorry to but in but Java6 is available for 32 and 64 bit. There is no
correlation between them that necessitates this. What would be the
reason to force 64 bit?

[Jean-Baptiste Queru]

Java6 is not available in 32-bit on all platforms.

Given that all of Google's development and testing happens on builds
created on 64-bit machines, there's some level of risk in letting
device manufacturers use 32-bit environments as we don't know what
happens in those cases. Java6 allows us to standardize on 64-bit and
eliminate that risk.

JBQ

--
Jean-Baptiste M. "JBQ" Queru
Software Engineer, Android Open-Source Project, Google.

Questions sent directly to me that have no reason for being private
will likely get ignored or forwarded to a public forum with no further
warning.

[Manfred Moser]

Fair enough. Thats a good reason. Thanks for clarifying.

[Garret]

This page

http://source.android.com/source/download.html

indicates that

"Ubuntu Linux (64-bit x86)
This has not been as well tested."

- Garret

On Jul 7, 12:36 pm, Jean-Baptiste Queru <j...@android.com> wrote:
> Java6 is not available in 32-bit on all platforms.
>
> Given that all of Google's development and testing happens on builds
> created on 64-bit machines, there's some level of risk in letting
> device manufacturers use 32-bit environments as we don't know what
> happens in those cases. Java6 allows us to standardize on 64-bit and
> eliminate that risk.
>
> JBQ
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 3:31 PM, Manfred Moser <mosa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Sorry to but in but Java6 is available for 32 and 64 bit. There is no
> > correlation between them that necessitates this. What would be the
> > reason to force 64 bit?
>

[Ying Wang]

So let's enforce a 64-bit build environment?
Just like what have enforced Java6, check if the host is 64-bit system
before doing any build.
I will be happy to make the change.. :-)

On Jul 7, 3:36 pm, Jean-Baptiste Queru <j...@android.com> wrote:
> Java6 is not available in 32-bit on all platforms.
>
> Given that all of Google's development and testing happens on builds
> created on 64-bit machines, there's some level of risk in letting
> device manufacturers use 32-bit environments as we don't know what
> happens in those cases. Java6 allows us to standardize on 64-bit and
> eliminate that risk.
>
> JBQ
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 3:31 PM, Manfred Moser <mosa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Sorry to but in but Java6 is available for 32 and 64 bit. There is no
> > correlation between them that necessitates this. What would be the
> > reason to force 64 bit?
>

[Tiago Vieira]

On 7 Jul 2010, at 23:36, Jean-Baptiste Queru wrote:

> Java6 is not available in 32-bit on all platforms.
>
> Given that all of Google's development and testing happens on builds
> created on 64-bit machines, there's some level of risk in letting
> device manufacturers use 32-bit environments as we don't know what
> happens in those cases. Java6 allows us to standardize on 64-bit and
> eliminate that risk.
>
>

Ah! So, that explains the problem I'm getting with the libz.so as well. I'm trying to build on a 32bits Ubuntu.

Tiago

>
>
> --
> Jean-Baptiste M. "JBQ" Queru
> Software Engineer, Android Open-Source Project, Google.
>
> Questions sent directly to me that have no reason for being private
> will likely get ignored or forwarded to a public forum with no further
> warning.
>

[Brian Austin]

But for platforms that have 32-bit java6? Just let the compile fail?

A warning about untested 32-bit builds would be sufficient enough.
Forcing 32/64 compiles without any documentation or printouts of
warnings is not a very flexible way to code IMO.

There needs to be more data to suggest that it is mandatory

[robert.m...@gmail.com]

Hmmm.... Did I miss something ?

manningr@dell-devpc:~/mydroid-2.2_r1.1$ uname -a
Linux dell-devpc 2.6.31-22-generic #60-Ubuntu SMP Thu May 27 02:41:03
UTC 2010 x86_64 GNU/Linux
manningr@dell-devpc:~/mydroid-2.2_r1.1$ repo init -u
git://android.git.kernel.org/platform/manifest.git -b android-2.2_r1.1

<snip>

manningr@dell-devpc:~/mydroid-2.2_r1.1$ mm sdk
============================================
PLATFORM_VERSION_CODENAME=REL
PLATFORM_VERSION=2.2

TARGET_PRODUCT=generic
TARGET_BUILD_VARIANT=eng
TARGET_SIMULATOR=
TARGET_BUILD_TYPE=release
TARGET_BUILD_APPS=
TARGET_ARCH=arm
HOST_ARCH=x86
HOST_OS=linux
HOST_BUILD_TYPE=release

BUILD_ID=FRF91
============================================
Checking build tools versions...
************************************************************
You are attempting to build with the incorrect version
of java.

Your version is: java version "1.6.0_14".
The correct version is: 1.5.

Please follow the machine setup instructions at
http://source.android.com/download
************************************************************
build/core/main.mk:117: *** stop. Stop.

On Jul 7, 6:36 pm, Jean-Baptiste Queru <j...@android.com> wrote:
> Java6 is not available in 32-bit on all platforms.
>
> Given that all of Google's development and testing happens on builds
> created on 64-bit machines, there's some level of risk in letting
> device manufacturers use 32-bit environments as we don't know what
> happens in those cases. Java6 allows us to standardize on 64-bit and
> eliminate that risk.
>
> JBQ
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 3:31 PM, Manfred Moser <mosa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Sorry to but in but Java6 is available for 32 and 64 bit. There is no
> > correlation between them that necessitates this. What would be the
> > reason to force 64 bit?
>

[Jean-Baptiste Queru]

2.2_r1.1 is a variant of froyo, which needs to be built with JDK 1.5.

JBQ

[robert.m...@gmail.com]

Oh, so the trunk requires 64-bit Java6, but the latest release version
(2.2_r1.1) still requires Java1.5 - correct ?

Rob

On Jul 9, 7:41 pm, Jean-Baptiste Queru <j...@android.com> wrote:
> 2.2_r1.1 is a variant of froyo, which needs to be built with JDK 1.5.
>
> JBQ
>

> On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 4:20 PM, Robert.M.Mann...@gmail.com

[Jean-Baptiste Queru]

That's correct.

All the open-source codelines that mirror Google's internal froyo
branches (i.e. froyo and the various android-2.2) use 1.5 like
Google's matching internal codelines do, since that is the version
that Google developed and tested with through the entire froyo
development cycle.

We backported the changes to switch to version 1.6 (64-bit) from our
internal master branch to the open-source master just as we switched
our internal master branch to 1.6, since from that point there was no
requirement for contributions to the open-source master branch to
build under 1.5 any more.

JBQ

[mri...@nii.net]

So, I'm probably not getting what's going on here, but how does this
work out for building ARM code? Seems compiling things like external/
clearsilver/java-jni/j_neo_cs.c, which uses jlongs for pointers, could
be rough.

[Jean-Baptiste Queru]

The code in question is purely host-side (i.e. x86_64). Target-side
aspects are unchanged.

JBQ

[mri...@nii.net]

If it is of interest to anyone, simply commenting out the many:

+# This forces a 64-bit build for Java6
+ifneq ($(filter 1.6%,$(java_version)),)
+ LOCAL_CFLAGS += -m64
+ LOCAL_LDFLAGS += -m64
+endif

blocks lets it build just fine on a 32-bit system (at least the
emulator seems to run ok).
Sun does have a Java 1.6 for 32-bit systems (jdk-6u21-linux-i586.bin).
Mike

[Austin, Brian]

I have posted about this patch as well, but have not gotten any feedback
from the maintainers about it that much. It seems very plausible to
allow a check for 32bit and issue a warning about "possible"
irregularities in doing a 32bit build. This patch seems very
constrictive to me.

brian

--

[Chris C.]

So, does this mean that development under Snow Leopard will now become
supported with the addition of Java 6?

Chris

[Jean-Baptiste Queru]

As far as I know there are still some issues (which may or may not be
related to the version of XCode used locally), but the switch to JDK
1.6 should remove one of the hurdles.

JBQ

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the "Android Building" mailing list.
> To post to this group, send email to android-...@googlegroups.com
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> android-buildi...@googlegroups.com
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/android-building?hl=en
>

--

[Dirk Jäckel]

Hi!

I know, its not supported to build with Snow Leopard. I just wanted to
let you know that I did successfully built master (as of some hours
ago) with my MacBook running Snow Leopard (64bit).

At first glance it looks the same as the Ubuntu (32bit) build. Wifi
and GSM are working


Dirk

On Jul 29, 11:59 pm, Jean-Baptiste Queru <j...@android.com> wrote:
> As far as I know there are still some issues (which may or may not be
> related to the version of XCode used locally), but the switch to JDK
> 1.6 should remove one of the hurdles.
>
> JBQ
>

[Dmitry Moskalchuk]

Hi,

It looks ugly from my point of view. Java6 has nothing to 32/64 bit.
For example, gcc installed into redhat x86 based distributions simply
can not produce 64-bit code. In this case option -m64 just fail the
build. I just bumped with that - I have server with redhat 5 and yes,
there is x86_64 processor but OS itself is 32-bit.

Dmitry Moskalchuk

On 13 июл, 21:08, "Austin, Brian" <Brian.Aus...@cirrus.com> wrote:
> I have posted about this patch as well, but have not gotten any feedback
> from the maintainers about it that much.  It seems very plausible to
> allow a check for 32bit and issue a warning about "possible"

> irregularities in doing a 32bitbuild.  This patch seems very

> constrictive to me.
>
> brian
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: android-...@googlegroups.com
>

> [mailto:android-...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of mrie...@nii.net

> Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2010 8:23 AM
> To: Android Building
> Subject: [android-building] Re:BuildErrorduringMake
>
> If it is of interest to anyone, simply commenting out the many:
>

> +# This forces a 64-bitbuildfor Java6

> +ifneq ($(filter 1.6%,$(java_version)),)
> + LOCAL_CFLAGS += -m64
> + LOCAL_LDFLAGS += -m64
> +endif
>

> blocks lets itbuildjust fine on a 32-bit system (at least the

[Jean-Baptiste Queru]

Actually, 32/64 bit does matter:

-there doesn't seem to be a way for a 64-bit JVM to load a 32-bit JNI library.

-there doesn't seem to be a way for a 32-bit JVM to allocate more than
a few GB of RAM.

JBQ

[Dmitry Moskalchuk]

Well, you're right but again, it should not be hardcoded in that way. Now there is condition - enable 64-bit build if Java6 used. Looks ugly because I absolutely don't see reason for such relation. What I suggest is separate option to enable 64-bit build (it could be enabled by default) but it should not be related to Java version. Otherwise you break build on all linux i[3456]86 distros which have disabled x86_64 code producing in theirs gcc packages (such as redhat based distros - redhat EL, centos, fedora).

--

Dmitry Moskalchuk

03.09.2010, в 18:14, Jean-Baptiste Queru написал(а):

[Jean-Baptiste Queru]

If you can figure out how to make it work with Ubuntu (Hardy and
Lucid) and MacOS (10.5 and 10.6), I'll ask our build system guys to
look at your contribution.

Thanks,
JBQ

[Dmitry Moskalchuk]

Ok, got it. Will try to figure out.

--

Dmitry Moskalchuk

03.09.2010, в 19:55, Jean-Baptiste Queru написал(а):

[Jean-Baptiste Queru]

I forgot to mention - it also needs to work in situations where a
(32-bit) Java 5 is installed and is actually the one in the path. We
(Android engineers at Google) need both Java 5 and Java 6 on our
machines.

JBQ

[Rehmet]

Hi Jean,

I used the commands in the http://source.android.com/source/download.html
mkdir mydroid
cd mydroid

repo init -u git://android.git.kernel.org/platform/manifest.git

repo sync

rehmet@nusantara-el:~/mydroid$ make

============================================
PLATFORM_VERSION_CODENAME=AOSP
PLATFORM_VERSION=AOSP
TARGET_PRODUCT=generic
TARGET_BUILD_VARIANT=eng
TARGET_SIMULATOR=
TARGET_BUILD_TYPE=release
TARGET_BUILD_APPS=
TARGET_ARCH=arm
HOST_ARCH=x86
HOST_OS=linux
HOST_BUILD_TYPE=release
BUILD_ID=OPENMASTER
============================================

Checking build tools versions...
************************************************************
You are attempting to build with the incorrect version
of java.

Your version is: java version "1.5.0_22".
The correct version is: 1.6.

Please follow the machine setup instructions at

http://source.android.com/source/download.html
************************************************************
build/core/main.mk:114: *** stop. Stop.

What is wrong here?

I am intending to port Android on some device, so, I think I'd better
start with Android 1.0 or 1.5?

Thanks.

On Jul 10, 6:41 am, Jean-Baptiste Queru <j...@android.com> wrote:
> 2.2_r1.1 is a variant of froyo, which needs to be built with JDK 1.5.
>
> JBQ
>

> On Fri, Jul 9, 2010 at 4:20 PM, Robert.M.Mann...@gmail.com

[Jean-Baptiste Queru]

If you're trying to port, you should be using the latest
tagged/numbered version, which is android-2.2_r1.1 at the moment.
Those still require Java 5 to build.

JBQ

[Rehmet]

Thanks Jean,

Now, I am emulating these websites

http://www.crashcourse.ca/wiki/index.php/Android_on_Ubuntu_10.04
http://www.omappedia.org/wiki/Android_Getting_Started

However, when I had error when I tried tagging:
~/mydroid $ git tag
fatal: Not a git repository (or any of the parent directories): .git

And, I did not get /vendor in magnifest.git
What seems to be the problem?

OK, now

$ repo init -u git://android.git.kernel.org/platform/manifest.git -b
android-2.2_r1.1

OK, I just did that in a new folder and now, after filling up my name
and email
$ repo sync

I'll get back to you.

On Sep 4, 1:59 am, Jean-Baptiste Queru <j...@android.com> wrote:
> If you're trying to port, you should be using the latest
> tagged/numbered version, which is android-2.2_r1.1 at the moment.
> Those still require Java 5 to build.
>
> JBQ
>

> On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 11:56 AM, Rehmet <rgnurrah...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi Jean,
>

> > I used the commands in thehttp://source.android.com/source/download.html

> >> >> >>> > I canmakea fix, however, I can't verify it for I don't have a 32-bit host

> >> >> >>> > available.
>
> >> >> >>> > On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 11:39 AM, frank.sposaro <frank.spos...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> >> >> >>> > > Hi. I have not seen this error for myself, but it looks java related
> >> >> >>> > > error along with gcc. Not being able to find the 64 bit stub file
> >> >> >>> > > probably means you need to double check how many bits your platform
> >> >> >>> > > is. I've read that the new build requires java 1.6 and 64 bit. I know
> >> >> >>> > > itusually cried if you have the wrong version of java, but idk if it

> >> >> >>> > > checks for 64  if you do have 64makesure you have the correct

> >> >> >>> > > version of gcc
>
> >> >> >>> > > On Jul 6, 9:58 am, Rudster816 <rudster...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> >>> > > > I just downloaded the Android source from the repo for the first time,

> >> >> >>> > > > and now when I attempt tomakeit I get the following error. All the

> ...
>
> read more »

[Jean-Baptiste Queru]

The top of the source tree isn't a git instance (because git instances
can't be nested), so you can't run git commands directly from there.

As of froyo (a few months ago), there's no vendor/ tree in the
open-source build any more. All the stuff that used to be there in
donut has been merged into the main platform code.

JBQ

[Rehmet]

It seems that I need to add these to get it built

ginanjar@nusantara-el:/usr/bin$ sudo update-alternatives --install /
usr/bin/jar jar /usr/java/jdk1.5.0_22/bin/jar 50
update-alternatives: using /usr/java/jdk1.5.0_22/bin/jar to provide /
usr/bin/jar (jar) in auto mode.
ginanjar@nusantara-el:/usr/bin$ sudo update-alternatives --install /
usr/bin/javah javah /usr/java/jdk1.5.0_22/bin/javah 50
update-alternatives: using /usr/java/jdk1.5.0_22/bin/javah to provide /
usr/bin/javah (javah) in auto mode.
ginanjar@nusantara-el:/usr/bin$ sudo update-alternatives --install /
usr/bin/javadoc javadoc /usr/java/jdk1.5.0_22/bin/javadoc 50
update-alternatives: using /usr/java/jdk1.5.0_22/bin/javadoc to
provide /usr/bin/javadoc (javadoc) in auto mode.

On Sep 4, 2:57 am, Jean-Baptiste Queru <j...@android.com> wrote:
> The top of the source tree isn't a git instance (because git instances
> can't be nested), so you can't run git commands directly from there.
>
> As of froyo (a few months ago), there's no vendor/ tree in the
> open-source build any more. All the stuff that used to be there in
> donut has been merged into the main platform code.
>
> JBQ
>

> ...
>
> read more »

[Rehmet]

Hi Jean,

What is Linux Kernel equivalent for this version? I think I need to
patch my linux distribution with this version of android kernel.

On Sep 4, 1:59 am, Jean-Baptiste Queru <j...@android.com> wrote:
> If you're trying to port, you should be using the latest
> tagged/numbered version, which is android-2.2_r1.1 at the moment.
> Those still require Java 5 to build.
>
> JBQ
>

> On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 11:56 AM, Rehmet <rgnurrah...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi Jean,
>

> > I used the commands in thehttp://source.android.com/source/download.html

> ...
>
> read more »

[Tiago Vieira]

So, how I would be managing the products I created on vendor/ when I port to Froyo?

I work with 3 different devices (three different ODMs), 4 products for each.

I presume that the devices I will be porting to the new folder device/, but what about the products ?

Thanks,
Tiago

[Rehmet]

Dear Jean,

I hope I didn't create misunderstanding, what I mean by porting is not
a full product, I just need
to bring it up / display, no other application shall be added? Should
I still use android-2.2_r1.1?
Or 1.5 would be easier to be used as patch and ported? (smaller files
and functionality)

> ...
>
> read more »

[Rehmet]

So, it is http://developer.android.com/sdk/android-2.2-highlights.html#PlatformTechnologies

2.6.32 kernel upgrade

* HIGHMEM support for RAM >256MB
* SDIO scheduling and BT improvements

My next question would be how much are RAM and ROM requirements?

> ...
>
> read more »