Ryan Oliver wrote: > The sysroot build is "misused" in pretty much the same way the original > native plfs toolchain was "misused".
Just another data point for the record. Here, a senior toolchain person confirms how sysroot is meant to be used (read the whole bug report for context): http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-binutils/2007-08/msg00110.html I quote: "You should use --prefix=/usr and install it with install_root=${sysroot}. The whole point of the sysroot feature is that it establishes a chroot style environment." Note, the "chroot style environment" that he's referring to is the equivalent of LFS Ch 6, not Ch 5. I stand by my claim that you're abusing the sysroot option and setting a very poor example of its use. Sidenote: Now that some toolchain devs are apparently using *native* sysroot builds, there is a temptation to pursue a whole new build method that bypasses most of Ch 5. However, we would most certainly lose a lot of the advantages of the current 2-phase approach, so gut instinct tells me this won't be viable. Obviously, ICA verification would be *critical* to such a build method. 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
