On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 12:29 AM, Jim Gifford <c...@jg555.com> wrote: > Greg Schafer wrote: >> Jim Gifford wrote: >> >> >>> Again Greg provide us more information about the ICA, it seems to be >>> your own creation? >>> >> >> 1. Read this post from Dan Nicholson: >> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lfs.devel/8120 >> >> 2. Look at the comments in the gsbuild scripts from DIY >> >> 3. Look at the jhalfs implementation (Note: I haven't) >> >> 4. Ask Ryan to explain it to you >> >> Regards >> Greg >> > Ok, so there is not technical background for these tests. For all we > know they could provide bogus errors. I need some good technical facts, > not hear say. I have searched and searched trying to find merit in this > type of comparison, I can't find anything at all.
How is it hearsay? Plenty of people (Greg, myself, Jeremy, Manuel, Matthew, etc.) here have used this analysis to identify issues in the build. The current ordering of the packages in LFS was determined almost entirely through use of ICA. It's really not magical at all and has a very straightforward technical implementation. The fact that Greg calls it ICA is really just an implementation detail. 1. Repeatedly build your system and keep a copy of each build. 2. Use diff/cmp to compare each build. This will highlight if bootstrapping has introduced any differences. I can't really think of any simpler way to determine if the bootstrapping technique has problems. The same thing happens during the gcc bootstrap process, and I don't see that being called meritless. The alternative is just to ignore any potential issues until something becomes broken. -- Dan -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
