From glibc-2.2.x to glibc-2.3.x
matthias at winterdrache.de
Fri Oct 25 11:45:06 PDT 2002
On Fri, 25 Oct 2002 16:58:21 +0100 Chris Lingard <chris at stockwith.co.uk>
> Original idea by Alfred Zastrow
> As mentioned in previous postings there are dificulties building
> an LFS system using the above libraries as base and target.
> This method has built LFS successfully. I have changed the install
> commands for glibc as follows:
[snip massive changes, lots of work]
> quite a few packages fail to install with the above nss file.
I have a bad feeling about this.
> The the build sequence has been modified;
Have you checked for hardcoded paths? Since the /static separation was
introduced, the build order is *very* fragile.
Why do you prefer this to the LD_LIBERRY_PATH hack? It's much more work
and much more likely to break things because unlike the LD_LIBERRY_PATH
hack it not only affects the /static binaries but also the chapter 6
binaries, and unlike the LD_LIBERRY_PATH hack which only affects bash, tar
and ls, the nsswitch affects *all* binaries.
Furthermore, don't forget that the segfault issue is a one time thing. You
only encounter it when you build a glibc-2.3 system on a glibc-2.2 system.
If your host already has glibc-2.3, you don't need to do anything.
Your solution would require a lot of changes spread out over the whole of
the LFS book, thereby affecting everyone, even the people who don't have
issues because their host runs glibc-2.3 already.
The LD_LIBERRY_PATH hack on the other hand is a simple set of commands
that can be put into chapter 5 like this:
If your host system runs glibc-2.2, then issue the following commands. If
your host runs glibc-2.3 or later, then skip them:
[insert LD_LIBERRY_PATH hack]
Do you see any benefits of the nsswitch hack that would make it preferable
for the LFS book?
Democracy is when the people has the right to make the wrong choices.
Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
and put 'unsubscribe lfs-dev' in the subject header of the message
More information about the lfs-dev