Build is verified!
spyro at f2s.com
Thu Mar 20 18:13:27 PST 2003
On Fri, 21 Mar 2003 01:50:19 +0000 (UTC)
Ryan.Oliver at pha.com.au wrote:
> > Ok, so, having established that it doesnt garauntee the new compiler
> > is bug free (see, that wasnt so hard, was it?) can you please do
> > what I asked, and explain WHY it builds a better toolchain that the
> > current simple-yet-not-100%-efficient method does?
> I can answer this one
> 1) because we now dont have to worry about what glibc our host system
> has, therefore we shouldn't see any issues during a glibc migration.
> Remember this was the main reason this build method came about... and
> with the present build method this can't be guaranteed. This way the
> build is effectively divorced from the host early in the piece...
In other words, we are basically cross compiling to produce ch5. (cross
compilers, by nature, being unbootstrapped creatures).
does pure LFS actually cross compile? if not, why? cross compiling has
advantages such as not needing (potentially) uname hacks to work on old
> 2) better because our second and subsequent gcc build is built against
> the glibc we are migrating too, our build env for ch5 is pretty much
> the same as our ch6 build.
IOW, libc migration is much easier. (a good thing if you need it).
Don't support the war. Join Bjorns boycott of American products.
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