glibc configparms file unnecessary

James Green jim at vardus.net
Tue Nov 28 03:24:21 PST 2000


Rudolf,

OK, so I am even more confused now...

My experience was that having built glibc-2.1.3 when building static
packages without confiparms was that when I tried to compile dynamic
packages in chroot env I got fatal errors. Rebuilding glibc with configparms
(outside chroot - i.e. in lfs partition of mandrake) fixed this.

I appreciate that you could replace glibc on a working system (lfs or not)
without using configparms, but I can't see  how you could build a LFS
without using it becuase of the options passed to configure. Surely glibc
will be installed in the wrong place - sure you could work around this, but
I don't think that is the point as we are discussing a by-the-book LFS here.

My observations would seem to match what Gerrard has to say about it too.

still confused,

James

----- Original Message -----
From: "Rudolf Floers" <r.floers at web.de>
To: <lfs-discuss at linuxfromscratch.org>
Sent: Monday, November 27, 2000 9:33 PM
Subject: Re: glibc configparms file unnecessary


> a few weeks I sent a message that we don't need the configparms file.
> gerard answered he wanted to add that to his TODO-list.
> (or was it TOTRY?)
> what about it, gerard?
>
> > This experience confuses me to what exactly you are arguing about. Have
you
> > tried building a LFS without configparms?
>
> yes, i have. 4 or 5 weeks ago. no problems.
>
>
> --
> Unsubscribe: send email to lfs-discuss-request at linuxfromscratch.org
> and put unsubscribe in the subject header of the message
>
>


-- 
Unsubscribe: send email to lfs-discuss-request at linuxfromscratch.org
and put unsubscribe in the subject header of the message




More information about the lfs-dev mailing list