GCC-3.4.1-20040601 - Pass 1
matthew at linuxfromscratch.org
Wed Jun 30 11:14:53 PDT 2004
On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 10:58:29 -0700 (PDT)
"Jeremy Utley" <jeremy at jutley.org> wrote:
> Randy McMurchy said:
> > "Unpack only the GCC-core tarball, as we won't be needing
> > the C++ compiler nor the test suite here."
> > This could be somewhat confusing to someone who isn't
> > familiar with the CVS GCC package. Perhaps this could be
> > commented out until there's an official release?
> No, the unstable book assumes familiarity with the build process for
> LFS - those using the unstable book are expected to know that our
> current tarball is a full tarball.
Just out of curiousity, is there any reason why unstable can't use the
fortnightly snapshots, rather than some arbitrary date-pulled CVS that
we have to distribute ourselves? Those snapshots are also available in
seperated tarballs, so the text will never be out-of-sync, and we
won't have to _assume_ anything about someone who might just have
happened to have glanced at the unstable book.
More information about the lfs-dev