Dan Nicholson wrote:
Hi again,
Here's some results from my ICA/Farce run of yesterday. They show
that the system will rebuild itself with the exception of a couple
things that probably won't be fixed by me. (stdc++ .la and gch
differences) These exist whether I use the LFS or DIY toolchain.
That's great news Dan. Thanks very much for your efforts on this, as
well as Jeremy's for maintaining the branch, Ken's for conjuring up ICA,
and everyone else that has investigated this new build order.
What I'd like to do now is:
1) Have the two toolchain bugs (1675 and 1677 - note that 1675's title
isn't entirely accurate!) fixed in LFS trunk. I'd need to re-read the
discussions on those two to figure out quite what's wrong and how to fix
them, or someone else could just post patches and I'll apply them
instead :-)
2) Have any remaining issues/changes highlighted in Dan's results
applied to the alphabetical branch.
3) Merge the alphabetical branch to trunk.
Before anyone complains that they don't know what these changes are or
don't think they are appropriate for LFS trunk I'll point out the
following:
1) Extensive analysis has been performed on the branch that proves, as
conclusively as currently possible I think, that using the new build
order, LFS can rebuild itself with no unexplainable differences in the
resultant binaries/libraries.
2) No such analysis has been performed on trunk as yet, again, to the
best of my knowledge. As such, it is possible that LFS currently may
not be able to rebuild itself without unexplainable differences.
3) Even if, by some wonderful stroke of luck, current LFS can rebuild
itself without any unexplainable differences, we're still left with a
big question..."how did the LFS author's decide on the build order?".
As mentioned in previous discussions about this, Whilst "through
evolution and luck" would be the honest answer, it certainly doesn't do
the reputation of a technical project like LFS any favours. Therefore,
I would propose that the answer more suited to the LFS project should be
"We chose to build the packages in alphabetical order unless package
dependencies or self-consistency (confirmed by iterative build
comparisons) required otherwise."
Regards,
Matt.
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
