On 2/8/07, Alexander E. Patrakov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Randy McMurchy wrote: > > > The current LFS SVN has an entirely upgraded toolchain, and many > > updates to core packages since the 6.2 release. I just built it and > > it appears rock solid. > > That's because you didn't use any CFLAGS. If you had -Os in CFLAGS, you > would hit ticket #1935.
Somewhat of a non-issue since we're telling people not to set their CFLAGS, but I'd rather see it get fixed, too. Fortunately, gcc-4.1.2 should be here soon as Matthew mentioned the other day: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2007-02/msg00061.html > Also, there are some GCC-4.1.1 related issues in BLFS Trac. I think most of those are known and should be folded in fairly soon. But, that's also what having the development version is about. Another think I was thinking about. Glibc has been getting released much more rapidly. LFS SVN is on 2.5, but most of us have been using 2.3.6 for a long time. I would say that this requires the most attention. Robert has put together a patch with updates from the upstream 2.5 branch. We may want to apply some or all of it: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/patches/downloads/glibc/glibc-2.5-branch_update-1.patch For GCC-4.1 problems in BLFS, they can usually be worked around for that particular package, which means they can be fixed after the LFS release. But if there are issues with the C libraries, that usually only means a fix to Glibc (think samba and xorg-server over the past couple years). So, I would hope that some of us on the BLFS side would get their systems rebuilt against LFS SVN and make sure everything's good before trying to cut a new release. -- Dan -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
