[LFS Trac] #684: Must re-evaluate package order then document the rationale.

Jeremy Huntwork jhuntwork at linuxfromscratch.org
Fri Mar 3 06:40:00 PST 2006

Dan Nicholson wrote:
>>  I say we ignore automake in autoconf testsuite.  They're circular, so
>>  either one has to be in /tools to get full coverage, or we just pick one
>>  that goes first.  No one is going to put autoconf in /tools since it
>>  already fights such a bitter battle to stay in LFS at all.  So, I say we
>>  keep the order alphabetical with the unfortunate effect that autoconf
>>  loses some test suite coverage.
> Is anyone else going to comment on the issue of
> libtool/autoconf/automake being used in each other's testsuites, thus
> causing circular dependencies?

Seeing that it's circular, and they work just fine (they are after all 
just shell scripts), I say we ignore the testsuites with a small note 
explaining the situation. If, at the end of the build, a person wants to 
go back and re-install autofoo/libtool and run all the testsuites, more 
power to them. We could even mention that as a possibility in the note.


More information about the lfs-book mailing list