Jeremy Huntwork wrote: > morfast wrote: > >> Hello,everyone >> >> I wrote a script to accomplish the building of the tool chain. I use a >> variable in the script instead of the /tools soft link to refer to the >> $LFS/tools directory. The script seems to finish without errors. But >> when I try to chroot to the $LFS directory, a error message was encountered: >> > > You've missed the point of the symlink. It's actually a very necessary > part of setting up the build environment, since it means that your paths > will look the same both inside and outside of chroot. > > There's nothing wrong with changing the value of the $LFS directory to > something besides '/mnt/lfs'. There's also nothing wrong with changing > 'tools' to be something else, if you're consistent, but you need to keep > the principle of the thing intact. > > Think about it... in the book's example, what you have after creating > the symlink is: > > /tools -> /mnt/lfs/tools > > Any packages you configure with '--prefix=/tools' wind up inside the > /mnt/lfs/tools directory because that symlink exists. The binaries you > made have been placed in /mnt/lfs/tools, but for all intents and > purposes, they work like they exist in /tools. > > So when you run the chroot command, you place yourself inside '/mnt/lfs' > and mask off anything in the path above that -- '/mnt/lfs' is the new > '/'. So now the binaries that thought they are in '/tools' outside of > chroot still work because '/mnt/lfs/tools' has now effectively become > '/tools'. You follow? > > > -- > JH > got it. I modified the variables in the script, make the /tools link, run the script again, it works.
thank you very much! -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
