An idea: isolate libs [was: Pure LFS]

Ryan.Oliver at Ryan.Oliver at
Sun Feb 9 19:08:06 PST 2003

Jack Brown wrote:
> Note this basically coresponds to the
> benifits of using Greg and Ryan's new method but does so in a way which
> is much simpler and does not introduce any further gotchas, by contrast
> it removes many former gotchas. (ie. things like
> "--with-ld=/lfs/static/bin/ld"

Not required with our build, in fact this option probably should not be
used at all as it limits some functionality ( see the gcc FAQ ).
Gcc finds the correct ld and as in its search path if both gcc and binutils
are built with the same prefix...

> or "cross-compiling = no" become
> completely irrelevant and unnessary)

As above for the above reasons...

So far have been using the ch6 build order from LFS 4.0, no horrible hacks
required at all...
Will have some further analysis over the next two days in regard to build
ch6 once compared to building ch6 twice...


Unsubscribe: send email to listar at
and put 'unsubscribe lfs-dev' in the subject header of the message

More information about the lfs-dev mailing list