HJL vs FSF binutils debate

Michael A. Peters mpeters at mac.com
Wed Apr 30 19:37:46 PDT 2003


On Wed, 2003-04-30 at 18:39, Ryan.Oliver at pha.com.au wrote:
> The build instructions are similar (even more so if you use the backported
> libpath configure option patch to FSF), all that requires mentioning is for
> HJL binutils you may need 'make configure-host'
> 
> Thoughts?
> [R]

I did hjl binutils on my box - interestingly enough, glibc build one
refused to build against static "gnu" binutils - but did fine against a
staticly compiled hjl . My host was Red Hat and they do weird things to
their toolchain like backport alpha and beta code into it - and this was
just after a glibc update on RH8 that caused other issues (some stuff
broke on the system - simple recompile of src.rpm fixed them).

In chapter six - I had to build something _before_ non static hjl
binutils that normally is built after. I forget what it was - I *think*
it was gnu gettext. Or maybe texinfo, but I think it was gettext.
Something that probably could have been avoided if I had told the
Makefile not to do a certain part.

-- 
Michael A. Peters <mpeters at mac.com>

-- 
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 mailing list