On Sun, 8 Jan 2006, Greg Schafer wrote:
Author: ken
Date: 2006-01-07 15:12:20 -0700 (Sat, 07 Jan 2006)
New Revision: 7256
Modified:
trunk/BOOK/chapter01/changelog.xml
trunk/BOOK/chapter06/chapter06.xml
Log:
Build mktemp earlier, for gcc's gccbug which now wraps mktemp in 'if [ yes =
yes ];' instead of 'if [ no = yes ];'.
This is a questionable change. Ken, do you realize that `gccbug' is almost
never used these days and is in fact scheduled for future removal by
upstream? Sure, it's an ICA difference (albeit only an ASCII one), but
it's harmless and the reason for it is understood. You've now changed the
order of the toolchain packages which is setting a bad precedent IMHO. All
I've interposed mktemp in front of gcc, so mktemp is built with the
chapter 5 gcc. No, I don't attempt to follow the gcc lists.
I'm not sure I fully understand your point, you seem to be saying that
gcc might be at risk from mktemp ?
/usr/bin/mktemp is _identical_ between my first build (book from two
days ago, mktemp built where it used to be), the first build from my
third ICA cycle (current svn book plus bison in chapter 5), and
subsequent builds from the third cycle.
Ken
--
das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
