bash-2.05b and --without-bash-malloc

Jeremy Utley jeremy at jutley.org
Sun May 11 10:57:19 PDT 2003


Under the PLFS process, --without-bash-malloc should not be necessary -
the problem seems to only occur with static bash building binutils -
dynamic bash-2.05b appears to work just fine.  And since we only build
bash dynamic with PLFS, the problem shouldn't even appear now.  This is
how I've been doing it since I first converted to the PLFS process.

-J-

> -----Original Message-----
> From: lfs-dev-bounce at linuxfromscratch.org 
> [mailto:lfs-dev-bounce at linuxfromscratch.org] On Behalf Of James Iwanek
> Sent: Sunday, May 11, 2003 2:44 PM
> To: lfs-dev at linuxfromscratch.org
> Subject: Re: bash-2.05b and --without-bash-malloc
> 
> 
> Gerard Beekmans wrote:
> 
> > On May 11, 2003 12:28 pm, James Iwanek wrote:
> >> IMHO the switch dosnt hurt so why not?
> > 
> > I'm not 100% if it hurst, that's why I'm asking. These kind 
> of things 
> > have a tendency to blow up in our faces.
> > 
> 
> well my current system is built on bash-2.05b with patches 
> and --without-bash-malloc
> 
> its working fine here ;-)
> --
> Jay
> -- 
> Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
> and put 'unsubscribe lfs-dev' in the subject header of the message
> 
> 
> 
> 

-- 
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