Recently, Somebody Somewhere wrote these words
> I've been following the list for about three months now, and
> during that time I've built three versions of HLFS: 20060101,
> 20060108, and 20060220. I've dutifully rebuilt the toolchain
> for each version (though not for multiple builds within a
> version), and it's led me to an (obvious) realization: I should
> be able to reuse an "older" toolchain to build a newer version
> of the source.
>
> As I read the HLFS book, during Chapter 6 (building the host
> system), the path is set to use the tools just built over those
> in the toolchain as soon as they are available (the +h). Since
> almost the first thing we do in Ch 6 is rebuild glibc and gcc,
> those should then be used for building any later code. The only
> exception is binutils, but since we don't patch that at all in
> the toolchain, I gather it should be fine.
>
> So... Is my conclusion that I can reuse an older toolchain
> (including in that the binutils-build dir that we need to keep
> for adjusting the toolchain later) correct? And if so, how
> would I know when an older toolchain is "expired" for a given
> version of the book?
>
> The only way I can think of to actually test the hypothesis is
> to build a system with an older toolchain and the current one,
> and compare them. Is there some better way to do this than to
> recursively test for same structure and file checksums?
>
> Thanks,
Sticking my neck out here, having built a couple of LFS distros,
- You can build chapter 5 stuff with any toolchain modern
enough to build chapter 5 well.
- You want to build chapter 6 with the stuff in chapter 5
If you don't, you are no longer building (H)LFS
As most rebuilding of the same system is done by developers, they
will want to rebuild chapter 5 anyhow.
If you want to build chapter 6 from last year's chapter 5, you're
on your own there, and write the hint please. There are some
complex possible errors or unforeseen problems you may encounter.
YMMV. We don't want the email when you run into trouble.
The real benefit of (H)LFS would be lost, in that you know this
instruction set and these patches have already built into
successful systems for others.
--
With best Regards,
Declan Moriarty.
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/hlfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
