Thanks for your reply, Bruce. On 23-11-2011 02:08, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 7:37 PM, Fernando de Oliveira > <fam...@yahoo.com.br> wrote: > >>>> 1. What is exactly a or the toolchain. >>> Binutils, gcc, and glibc. Arguably, whichever other >>> packages gcc >>> currently needs (gmp, mpc, mpfr). >> Thanks. However, encouraged by the Chapter 12. Programming of BLFS, sometime >> ago I did upgrade gcc: > Yes, that can be done. It won't affect anything already built, but it > may cause problems with new builds. On the other hand, there is > rarely a pressing need to update gcc. I had a problem (cannot remember details), with the upgrade from 4.5.2 to 4.6.1 (or 4.6.2 ?), in LFS6.8. >>>> 2. How far can one upgrade LFS >>> I upgrade the non-toolchain LFS packages on my systems to >>> fix vulnerabilities, I see no reason to upgrade them for any >>> other reason - the versions in a released LFS book ought to work >>> well together, upgrading something later might break >>> things. > I really don't have any problems with doing in-place upgrades beyond > the tool chain. Some packages are sensitive to autoconf or automake, > but generally that can be worked around. For most packages, they are > not even used. Ok. Thanks. [...] >> The three machines have perl-5.14.2, now. >> >>> Similarly, for desktop packages I usually only upgrade to >>> fix vulnerabilities, but occasionally for new functionality. >>> Realistically, a desktop LFS that is more than 18 months >>> old is probably due to be replaced. [...] > The hard one to upgrade is glibc because every program relies on it. > Upgrading gcc does not affect already built programs. You can upgrade > binutils, but I have never seen a need to do so. Ok. > As a general rule, I'd say to upgrade a package only when you know of > a need. At some point, you make decide that you want to upgrade > everything, so then build a new system, otherwise just use it. One > of the big advantages of LFS is that you control what is being done > and are not subject to "Patch Tuesday". > > Also I agree with Ken's comment on udev, but that also falls into the > realm of update when needed. > > -- Bruce Right! Thanks again, Bruce. -- []s, Fernando de Oliveira Natal, RN, BRAZIL -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
