GCC-3.4.3 test errors (seg faults)

Jeremy Huntwork jhuntwork at linuxfromscratch.org
Mon Dec 12 19:32:08 PST 2005

Justin R. Knierim wrote:

> IMO, with the old scripts we wouldn't have been any better off.  Trying
> to add packages, patches, etc to the old Makefiles is so much more ugly
> and complex than the new Makefiles.  Also IMO, new releases of the
> LiveCD are a given, as LiveCD depends on so many external elements like
> the ftp packages repo, nALFS, now jhalfs and of course LFS.  We would
> have needed a 6.1.1-2 release with the old makefiles also.  Changes
> happen....new releases are required.  I got chewed out enough in
> #lfs-support for not releaseing a 6.1-4 LiveCD since it contained a lot
> of bugs also, including not being able to build nALFS with the included
> packages.

It wasn't the scripts themselves I was worried about - it was the
introduction of new unknowns. Anyway, that's all water under the bridge.

> Yes, and I am more confident about 6.1.1-2.  I employed a team of
> volunteer testers on the list and in #lfs-support who tested the beta
> versions of 6.1.1-2 with me, and helped immensly with finding new bugs. 
> So, we should be back in business.  The 6.1.1-2 release is out and has
> been announced.

You're doing a good job - my reaction before was just that: a reaction.
I should have looked in the repo before saying anything. Sorry again,
and thanks again for being on top of this stuff.


More information about the livecd mailing list