An idea: isolate libs [was: Pure LFS]
srm at netcomuk.co.uk
Sat Feb 8 14:50:43 PST 2003
On Sat, 2003-02-08 at 20:08, Rui Ferreira wrote:
> Steve Martin wrote:
> >>snip loads of interesting stuff<
> Interesting? It was the same thing that you wrote but in the way I saw it!
Yes it was.
> > the bootstrap over the three phases. Also I would build glibc with just
> > the linux headers at every pass which, according to the glibc docs,
> > removes any dependancy on any pre-existing c library, so chrooting is
> > unnecessary.
> But you do need to staticly compile the systems utilities so that they
> continue to work after the library to which they were compiled against is
> gone, right?
> Chrooting seems unnecessary, but isn't it safer or pure to start with the
> cleanest, most controled environment possible?
The first pass is static as per Greg and Ryans' instructions, the
remaining passes are dynamic, after all they are againt the first pass
glibc. The remainder of chapter 5 should be dynamic. Chrooting is
Steve Martin <srm at netcomuk.co.uk>
Still can't think of anything witty to write here.
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