Re: 7.0 Goals (top level bootstrap)

[Greg Schafer]

Robert Connolly wrote:

> With HLFS I'm leaning towards bootstrapping the chroot toolchain. It's how 
> the 
> GCC developers would want it.

You cannot speak for the GCC developers, so please don't. IMHO you are WAY
off the mark anyway.

> I don't know if LFS has also considered the top level makefile build method 
> being promoted by GCC/GNU, so that GCC and Binutils are built together in the 
> same tree. The difference here is that Binutils is also bootstrapped like 
> GCC.

I have considered it, but ruled it out for obvious reasons. What's more, I
don't know why you think this is something new. Building "combined tree"
toolchains has been an integral part of the top level build system ever
since the Cygnus Solutions days. What *is* new is the fact that the
assembler and linker can now also be bootstrapped as part of the 3-stage
GCC bootstrap process.

You have apparently overlooked the obvious fact that combined tree builds
are designed for *developers* working from svn trunk. They are clearly not
suitable for builds based on tarballs which is what we as *consumers* are
using. Just look at the hacks you have to use to create the combined tree.
If the big distros ever start using a combined tree, that's when we should
look at it IMHO.

Regards
Greg
-- 
http://www.diy-linux.org/

-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: 7.0 Goals (top level bootstrap)

[Robert Connolly]

With HLFS I'm leaning towards bootstrapping the chroot toolchain. It's how the 
GCC developers would want it.

I don't know if LFS has also considered the top level makefile build method 
being promoted by GCC/GNU, so that GCC and Binutils are built together in the 
same tree. The difference here is that Binutils is also bootstrapped like 
GCC.

They're both related. GCC wants to reduce bug reports related to the host 
system. By boostrapping as many host dependencies as possible, or all of 
them, dependency problems are reduced or eliminated. This is in the LFS 
spirit of escaping the host system to build a new one.

For the moment I don't think the top level makefile system is perfected, but 
building GCC and Binutils together is fairly straight foreward. With GCC-4.2 
and Binutils-2.18, Binutils' libiberty needs to be used to replace GCC's (if 
any of you want to test this).

Perhaps this is an LFS-8.0 idea, but I think it's worth discussion because 
it's how the GCC, Binutils, and GNU, projects are going towards.

robert

On Monday September 17 2007 12:20:01 am Greg Schafer wrote:
> Another thing, this has now become decidedly harder with GCC-4.2 because
> of configure arguments. ie: we now have to pass --disable-bootstrap to
> prevent the bootstrap, but configure strings get embedded into at least
> some of the executables which stuffs up binary comparisons. I might have
> to come up with some other way of comparing the builds, possibly using the
> same technique as the GCC bootstrap itself, which essentially compares
> object files in the build dirs.
>
> Regards
> Greg
> --
> http://www.diy-linux.org/




pgpciFNN2ttSG.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page