> > What more do we need to add? Or can we just close the ticket? > > I think it was addressed in the updates Matt made about four months > ago > > and about 2 months after ticket 2412 was opened. > > I'm happy to close that ticket off, I don't think it needs any more > explanation but am open to suggestions. I'll close the ticket on > Monday if > we've had no further comments, if that's OK?
I think it can use a bit more refining. I'm writing this email without relying on existing knowledge. If I read the page as-is without having any additional knowledge in the area of cross-compiling, it doesn't quite make sense yet. There are the three bullets that explain three key technical points. Comments on the first two: 1) Slightly adjusting the name of the working platform, by changing the "vendor" field target triplet by way of the LFS_TGT variable, ensures that the first build of Binutils and GCC produces a compatible cross-linker and cross-compiler. Instead of producing binaries for another architecture, the cross-linker and cross-compiler will produce binaries compatible with the current hardware. 2) The temporary libraries are cross-compiled. This removes all dependency on the host system, lessens the chance of headers or libraries from the host corrupting the new tools and allows for the possibility of building both 32-bit and 64-bit libraries on 64-bit capable hardware. We should add why cross-compiling removes all dependency on the host system. The statement as-is implies that regular compiling does not yield the same result. That has to be explained rather than just taking the statement at face value. Providing an example would go a long way to illustrate the problem. An example of how the host can corrupt the temporary libraries when you don't cross-compile would be very educational as well. It helps in proving that cross-compiling really is recommended. This whole portion of the build process plays a very important role. Right now that one page doesn't explain the many issues that cross-compiling overcomes. One of the questions that may come up is why we didn't cross-compile in older versions of the book. We obviously encountered problems and changed the process in the book. But the rationale behind that is still missing and not clearly explained. Please keep in mind the above comments are written by ignoring any knowledge that somebody might actually have. Put yourself in a reader's shoes who is pretty new to this compiling thing and in particular cross-compiling. Gerard -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
