Too many patches!

J. Jones jjones at
Fri Jul 13 20:30:31 PDT 2001

On Sat, Jul 14, 2001 at 11:10:38AM +0800, Steve Bougerolle wrote:
> I've just been building a new system using 3.0pre-4 (after building
> previously from 3.0pre-1).  There seem to be way more patches to download
> and apply with this version than before.  I didn't have the patches handy
> and had done this before without patches, so I just ignored them this time
> and all seems to have compiled perfectly well anyway.
> Given all this, I have to ask - WHY are all these patches listed in the book?
> If you start building a whole pile of special patches to download and
> apply, then it isn't "from scratch" any more and might as well be another
> distribution.  
> If there are good, necessary reasons for these patches then please tell us
> in the book what they do.  Some of the older ones are explained, like the
> patch to tar that allows one to use bz2, but there's a lot of stuff in
> there which has no point I'm aware of.

It looks to me like the patches created for gcc 3.0 based systems (CVS) were
mistakenly (?) put into 3.0-pre4.

Patches you can't build without:
  fileutils (char *somefunction () declarations the new glibc doesn't like)
  gzip (static only, but this depends on your glibc version (2.0, I believe))
  shadow patch (undefined variable used)

Gcc 3.0 specific patches:

Cosmetic patches:
  man (this "fixes" it's configure script so you don't have to use the -ask option
       to get the proper values out of it)
  man-pages (adds a few man pages to the package)
  sysvinit (changes init's messages (who cares?))

The man patch is also one you can't build without if you follow the books instructions.

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

More information about the lfs-dev mailing list