CVS -vs- 4.1

Gerard Beekmans gerard at
Wed May 7 19:32:47 PDT 2003

On May 7, 2003 08:13 pm, Mike Miller wrote:
> All right.  So I'm about to make a new LFS version (as our current one is
> aging quite nicely) and curious as to opinion on if I should follow CVS or
> 4.1 versions of the book.  There are a TON of major changes in the way
> things are getting done (from the pure LFS doc).  Has this been stable
> enough to build critical services off of or should I take the safe 4.1
> route?

Whereas Jesse prefers 4.0 over 4.1 or CVS, I myself don't think that 4.1 is 
all that bad. It's for sure a lot newer in respect to software versions (not 
the latest of course but for sure more up to date than 4.0 was).

I don't recommend CVS quite yet, all those changes that have been made still 
need to be tested, mostly to make sure I put them in properly (the concept of 
pure-lfs itself has been tested thoroughly already and many people are using 
it in production state. It's just a matter of working out some of the bugs 
I've undoubtedly slipped in).

If you can wait a bit, I suggest waiting a week or something to that effect. I 
plan to rebuild all my systems at home using LFS-CVS when it stabalizes a 
bit. It'll be a good field test (for me at any rate) as I use the machines 
for different purposes so any problems should show up fairly quickly then 

> As well, anyone know about upgrading?  Can I upgrade GLIBC, GCC, etc. after
> the fact to newer versions (often minor version changes)?  Nobody has EVER
> given me a clear answer on IRC, help boards, or mailing lists as to what I
> have to do to upgrade such products.

Upgrading Glibc is a touchy subject: it depends from which Glibc version you 
are upgrading from. If you currently have Glibc-2.2.x and you upgrade to 
2.3.x, there is a very high chance that a lot of your static libraries won't 
work anymore due to changes in the libnss code, but there can be many other 
problems too, it's highly version dependant.

I have upgraded my own system from glibc-2.2.5 to glibc-2.3.1 a while back and 
it went without a problem, but that was because I applied a patch that 
reversed some of those libnss problems (if you want all the details, I 
suggest reading the archives. The problem has been discussed in great detail 
and LFS-4.1 actually uses that patch throughout chapter 6).

Upgrading GCC is easier as GCC isn't often used at run-time, only at compile 
time. Worst case scenario is that your new GCC is installed in a wrong way so 
that it can't compile programs, but that's rare especially if you run a 
bootstrap which almost guarantees a working GCC installation.

There can be a slight pitfal when it comes to libstdc++ that comes with GCC. 
Some C++ programs link against that library and if you upgrade, there might 
be an incompatibility. As with Glibc, this depends on which version you start 
from and which version you are upgrading to.

Gerard Beekmans

/* Linux Consultant --- OSDN / DevChannel *
 * Technical Writer --- CheapBytes        */

/* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */

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