Bryan Kadzban wrote: > Bruce Dubbs wrote: >> Has it been shown that the current method has leaks from the build >> system into the new LFS system? If so, I'm not aware of them. Can >> you point to anything specific? > > If you use a host with "new" binutils (2.15.x), but are building "old" > binutils (2.14 was what was current when this issue came up), then after > you install the "old" binutils, linking won't work anymore. gcc's specs > file uses --as-needed, because 2.15.x supported it, but the ld from 2.14 > will fail because it doesn't support it.
Using this as a reason for cross building is a hell of a stretch IMHO. Once understood, the problem is minor and easily worked around. It's simply an artifact of the way PATH is handled in the current build. More info here: http://www.diy-linux.org/pipermail/diy-linux-dev/2004-August/000050.html In fact, cross building introduces a regression in PATH handling in the pre-chroot phase. One no longer gains the advantage of having newly built tools integrated into the build process as they get installed and become available. While not a major problem, it is a factor that must be considered, and it's something likely to bite when building on older hosts. (The solution of course is to first build a bunch of host tools, but how far do you want to go? BTW, Ryan's scripts address host tools but the current cross-lfs docs do not. You must build some host tools on older hosts or else the cross build will blow up.) 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
