On 01/30/2016 10:57 AM, Pierre Labastie wrote:
On 30/01/2016 10:52, Frans de Boer wrote:
LS,
It has come to my attention that the build directories for binutils, gcc and
glibc are now suppose to be within the source tree. To me, having it outside
the source tree always worked for these three packages. What inspired the
change? After all, it is a learning project.
It has been extensively discussed on the LFS-dev list. See the thread starting
at:
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/pipermail/lfs-dev/2016-January/070725.html
Regards
Pierre
Thanks,
I have read it and understand why this was done. However:
1) CMake does not require you to have the build directory within the
source tree. It may be outside that tree too.
2) Having a build directory within the source tree is the same as having
it outside the srcdir. In case things go wrong, you only have to remove
the build directory - no matter where it resides (except remark 4).
3) Many packages do not build right when using any kind of separate
build directory. This is more frequent with multimedia packages where
the development started a long time ago. It's something to keep in mind.
4) A few packages I have seen - eg. qemu, nginx etc - still affect the
source tree during the building process. So, if things go wrong, you
better replace the whole source tree with a fresh one.
Beside the above, I will adopt the new approach of having the build
directory within the source tree. More or less because of the last remark.
Regards,
Frans.
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Do not top post on this list.
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style
