Lessons to be learnt from recent events

Greg Schafer gschafer at zip.com.au
Tue Jan 28 19:58:48 PST 2003

On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 07:23:27PM -0700, Gerard Beekmans wrote:
> On January 28, 2003 07:03 pm, Greg Schafer wrote:
> > I think it worth mentioning that the recent fsckup with the gcc/binutils
> > thing could have been picked up much earlier had someone simply ran a "make
> > check" for glibc.
> Maybe it's time we start adding 'make check' commands to the book then, for 
> those packages where it's possible.

Possibly. Will hopefully cover this in the hint.

> > On a related note, I'll make mention here that Ryan Oliver and myself are
> > working on a new initiative to build a pure LFS. You might recall Ryan's
> > post from a few weeks back outlining some new ideas. It is essentially a
> > new angle on the build method focussing on building a correct toolchain. It
> > will initially take the form of a hint. We've been at it for a while now
> > and will hopefully have something concrete in a week or two.
> Aside from the current binutils/gcc problem, exactly what else is wrong with 
> the current method that doesn't result in a correctly built toolchain?

There is simply just too much that can go wrong. Witness the plethora of
waffle re recent "libnss" and "build glibc twice" threads on the list. The
whole thing needs a bit of a rethink to make it more robust and less error
prone and thus more "future proof", which is what we are working towards.
Best for me not to say any more until we have it all sorted. Less words,
more action! :-)

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