Re: [lfs-support] LFS 8.0 Section 6.10 possible typo (or else confusing statement)

[Mark Pokorny]

> I don't understand your question.
> $ ls -ld /lib64
> drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Feb 13 19:28 /lib64
> ls -l /lib64
> total 0
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 27 Feb 13 19:28 ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 ->
> ../lib/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 27 Feb 13 19:28 ld-lsb-x86-64.so.3 ->
> ../lib/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2
>-- Bruce


Ah, my apologies; I misunderstood what was happening. I thought this
was a leftover reference to /lib64 itself being a symlink – I didn’t
cop that the contents were, themselves, symlinks, and that these
symlinks pointed to the linkers held in /lib (even though these
symlinks were created in the previous chapter).

Thanks for clarifying,

Mark.
-- 
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

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 8.0 Section 6.10 possible typo (or else confusing statement)

[Bruce Dubbs]

Mark Pokorny wrote:

On 19 February 2017 at 22:28, Bruce Dubbs  wrote:

Hazel Russman wrote:


In the sanity tests for glibc, the book says:
[Requesting program interpreter: /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2]
Note that /lib is now the prefix of our dynamic linker.

The output is as shown but the explanation is confusing. The linker is
indeed in /lib but the output actually says
/lib64, referring to the symbolic link.



OK, I'll clarify that.



I am currently building an LFS-8.0 (systemd) (having already built
LFS-7.10) and have just come to this section. Hasn’t the /lib64 → /lib
symlink been removed in this version of the book (i.e. /lib64 is now a
full-blown directory in its own right)?


I don't understand your question.

$ ls -ld /lib64
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 Feb 13 19:28 /lib64

ls -l /lib64
total 0
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 27 Feb 13 19:28 ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 -> 
../lib/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 27 Feb 13 19:28 ld-lsb-x86-64.so.3 -> 
../lib/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2


  -- Bruce

--
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

[lfs-support] New Compile Options for GLibC 2.25 in §6.9

[Mark Pokorny]

Hi all,

Just wanted to say a quick thanks for all the hard work in making the
LFS-8.0 book.

In Chapter 6.9 of LFS-8.0-systemd, GLibC-2.25 is configure with two
new options that were not present in LFS-7.10
(‘--enable-stack-protector=strong’ and ‘libc_cv_slibdir=/lib’), and
the information about them is not listed underneath. What do these new
options do?

Regards,

Mark
-- 
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

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 8.0 Section 6.10 possible typo (or else confusing statement)

[Mark Pokorny]

On 19 February 2017 at 22:28, Bruce Dubbs  wrote:
> Hazel Russman wrote:
>>
>> In the sanity tests for glibc, the book says:
>> [Requesting program interpreter: /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2]
>> Note that /lib is now the prefix of our dynamic linker.
>>
>> The output is as shown but the explanation is confusing. The linker is
>> indeed in /lib but the output actually says
>> /lib64, referring to the symbolic link.
>
>
> OK, I'll clarify that.
>
>   -- Bruce

I am currently building an LFS-8.0 (systemd) (having already built
LFS-7.10) and have just come to this section. Hasn’t the /lib64 → /lib
symlink been removed in this version of the book (i.e. /lib64 is now a
full-blown directory in its own right)?

Mark
-- 
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