static vs dynamic linking

Joel Miller cheeziologist at mail.isc.rit.edu
Fri Jul 4 11:53:16 PDT 2003


On Fri, 04 Jul 2003 12:50:34 -0600, Dennis J Perkins 
<djperkins at americanisp.net> wrote:

> I was looking at how the the toolchain is built in the development 
> version of LFS and I have a question.  Why bother with static linking 
> anymore?  Unless I am mistaken, when you build binutils and gcc the first 
> time, you actually statically linking the host's libraries.  After glibc 
> is built, you lock into the new glibc in /stage1 and then rebuild 
> binutils and gcc to use the new glibc.  Since you don't chroot until 
> later, static linking is not necessary.
>

I am not the best person to answer this question, but all i can tell you is 
two things. First, it has something to do with multiple levels of removing 
yourself from your host system so as to have a more clean tool chain. 
Second, the best way for you to understand is to read the pure lfs hint. I 
believe it is still located at hints.linuxfromscratch.org and it should be 
able to provide you with the explinations you require.

-- 
Registered LFS User 6929
Registered Linux User 298182
cheeziologist at attbi dot com is about to be invalid...plz use this new 
address

-- 
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