On 6/3/19 4:04 PM, Thomas Trepl via lfs-dev wrote:
Hi all,
i'm just in the process of running thru a modified book including
(most of) the version upgrades (linux, e2fsprogs, perl, eudev, bison,
openssl) to see what happens using them. I just saw that they has been
commited in the minute...
I was to slow in reporting my findings (while compilation and checks
are currently still running), but it seems so that the sed in perl
regarding the gcc-versions is no longer required.
When upgrading LFS packages, i think we should do a quick check on
seds or patches created by our own whether they are still required.
There are only five patches, so they don't come up very often. I did
miss the perl sed, but will do that tomorrow. I do do a test build, so
the perl sed doesn't hurt even if it is not needed and more.
Thats also true for e2fsprogs-1.45.2 were a fix has been included due
to my report of that strange install behavior in case /etc/cron.d does
not exist. The option --with-crond-dir=no is no longer required for
LFS (while does not harm anyway) as e2fsprogs now does the checking
right.
Thanks, I'll look at that too.
I'm also testing the new bc (#4436) which seems to be actively
maintained and is now on v2.0.2. Looks like it works well - at least i
didn't notice any failures trackable down to bc.
We had some contact with the developer and I was waiting for a go-ahead
from him.
Btw, we have statements in gcc echoing a #define
STANDARD_STARTFILE_PREFIX_1 etc. to some files. Couldn't that be
simplified if we change gcc/gcc.c (the STANDARD_STARTFILE_PREFIXes are
defined there)? I'm going to test that when build is finished...
I'm hesitant to change the working instructions for gcc, but let us know
the results of your testing.
-- Bruce
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
