Jeremy Huntwork wrote: > On Fri, Jul 20, 2007 at 11:38:30AM -0700, Dan Nicholson wrote: >> Thanks for the info. I think just to get started on handling multiple >> arches in LFS, we should focus on non-multilib 64 and just symlink >> /lib -> /lib64. Hopefully it doesn't bite elsewhere, but I think it's >> the fastest way to get up and running. Multilib is definitely the way >> to go, but I think it's more important to just get a 64 bit build in >> before handling the much larger case. Then again, I haven't done >> anything, so this is just speculation. > > Agreed. > > I believe I have the necessary changes worked through in a working copy > of the x86_64 branch I made the other day. Due to time constraints I > haven't been able to finish a full build, but I believe what is there > will work. I do plan on testing it fully before I commit any changes, > but I figured I'd show what I have and give someone else the opportunity > to build it if they like and/or look for any obvious errors. > > Here's the rendered book: > http://linuxfromscratch.org/~jhuntwork/lfs-x86_64 Should we add lfs-x86_64 to to jhalfs now or wait a few weeks/months? I assume there will be a multi-lib version after all objections/ideas have been aired. (planning ahead for jhalfs) > > And here's the current diff (so you can see the changes in a glance): > http://linuxfromscratch.org/~jhuntwork/x86_64-changes.diff > > The two gcc pure64 patches come from CLFS. > > -- > JH
-- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
