El Sábado, 1 de Octubre de 2005 23:49, Ken Moffat escribió:
> There is a slight difficulty with starting at binutils in Contructing a
> Temporary System - we only build binutils and gcc once and we don't
> build glibc at all ;) Realistically, the multi-arch book would need
> sections added. Also, we're using ${LFS_TARGET}-gcc and friends - it
> doesn't feel right to specify LFS_TARGET in a native build, and there
> are config.cache things that are only needed in a cross-compile.
Yes, the creation of the temporally tools must be different on both sets of
books.
> I'm all in favour of extending the platforms that people can reliably
> use for LFS, but I don't see tangible gains - as I read your proposal,
> there would be two books with a common source. Users might be attracted
> by not having to cross-compile, but equally they might think that issues
> in "cross-lfs" were unrelated to their "multi-arch lfs".
I see a common sources, but two differen projects with their own rendering
books pulled from that sources: multi-arch books in LFS and cross-build books
in Cross-LFS.
> I'm also a little worried that rendering the book will become unwieldy.
> It already strains my patience ;)
If you are rendering/validating all book each time that you made a little
change in the sources, yes, the process is very long.
But if the change you made only affect some archs, you can validate/render
only that books (for example, mips ands mips64) adding "ARCH=mips mips64" to
the make command.
--
Manuel Canales Esparcia
Usuario de LFS nº2886: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org
LFS en castellano: http://www.escomposlinux.org/lfs-es http://www.lfs-es.com
TLDP-ES: http://es.tldp.org
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
