Greg Schafer wrote: > Hmmm, thinking about this some more, there might actually be another > option and that's the one already raised by Alex ie: don't bootstrap GCC > pass1 (possibly move the bootstrap to pass2 as suggested by Jeremy). As it > currently stands, the new tools start being used in combo with the host > glibc during stage2 of the bootstrap. We could avoid this by dropping the > bootstrap of pass1. That leaves the only exposed areas as kernel headers > installation and glibc configure, but if they cause problems, we might be > able to get away some PATH twiddling. There might be some merit here.. > I'll chew on it for a while and maybe try some tests.
Funny that you mentioned this tonight. I was going to test that setup on the jh branch tonight if I had the time. Looking forward to seeing the results of your tests. -- JH -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
