New Years Eve 2004 Status Report

James Robertson jwrober at
Mon Jan 3 07:32:15 PST 2005

Jeremy Utley wrote:
> Greetings all!
> As 2004 winds down to a close, its time for another status report on 
> LFS-Unstable.  The following items constitute the differences between 
> LFS-Testing and LFS-Unstable.
> Automake 1.9.4
> Bison 2.0
> GCC 3.4.3
> Glibc 20041220
> LFS-Bootscripts 3.1.0
> Linux 2.6.10
> Man-Pages 2.0.1
> Perl 5.8.6
> Sysvinit 2.86
> Tar 1.15.1
> TCL 8.4.9
> Udev 050
> Util-Linux 2.12p
> In my opionion, most of the above are ready to migrate into testing. The 
> only things I'd like to keep in Unstable for now are Bison-2.0 and 
> LFS-Bootscripts 3.1.0 - both of these are very recent releases with 
> minimal testing.  I'd also like to hold off on upgrading Glibc for now, 
> as the 2.3.4 Glibc tarball should be forthcoming quite soon.

I like this idea Jeremy.  How long till Glibc 2.3.4?  Can we wait for 
that for LFS 6.1?  I printed a copy of LFS Testing and have some textual 
edits I want to see added in.  Noting major.  I have to get my unstable 
box finished off first.

> There's also 3 patches that have been added to LFS-Unstable - patches 
> from upstream for Linux 2.6.10 and vim 6.3 to fix security 
> vulnerabilities, and the Util-linux patch for cramfs compilation 
> developed by Alexander.  These are also things I'd recommend adding into 
> testing.  Also, a minor change to the Shadow installation instructions 
> to suppress the installation of the groups binary and man page, courtesy 
> of Archaic, as well as use of the --libdir directive to install 
> libraries to /lib instead of /usr/lib in the zlib, readline, and shadow 
> builds, courtesy of Jim Gifford.


> If anyone has any serious technical issues with upgrading these packages 
> in Unstable, please, let us know.  So far, testing looks quite solid 
> with them, but you never know.
> Now, for things that are up and coming:
> 1) Ryan Oliver's new cross-build techniques are showing definate 
> promise.  Initial development of this will take place in a branch, 
> because the changes are very invasive.  Once the changes are complete, 
> they will most likely be merged back into Unstable.

Cool, look forward to seeing that.

> 2) Jim and Manuel have been working on a prototype of a multi-arch XML 
> structure.  Initial testing of this was done with 3 different arch's - 
> x86, ppc, and mips, and looks promising.  This is also taking place in a 
> branch currently.
> 3) GCC developers should be making a branch tree for GCC-4.0 within the 
> next few weeks.  At some point, we'll probably do some playing with 
> pre-releases of GCC 4 in Unstable to prepare ourselves for the changes 
> that it will bring.
> Thanks to everyone who has helped with testing of LFS-Unstable, and 
> especially to Matthew and Alexander for their help in creating the 
> patches now in use.


More information about the lfs-dev mailing list