On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 5:21 PM, Andrew Benton <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 16:00:38 -0600 > Bruce Dubbs <[email protected]> wrote: > > > My proposal is to just skip 'arch' completely as I do not believe it is > > not used anywhere in LFS/BLFS. > > It is used in several places in BLFS (eg the pages for Liba52, nss and > nspr), but I'm sure uname -m will work just as well. > > We discussed the whole arch vs uname -m thing here http://linuxfromscratch.org/pipermail/lfs-dev/2012-February/065811.html and I thought the decision was to just go with the one in util linux and let it be. Seems to be we are re-hashing something not worth the effort. James
-- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
