David Jensen wrote: > On Sat, 06 Jul 2013 15:22:01 -0500 > Bruce Dubbs <bruce.du...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Armin K. wrote:
>>>>> I suggest we build everything for 2.6.32 kernel from now on >>>>> (glibc's --enable-kernel switch). Why 2.6.32? Well, It appears no >>>>> distro yet builds with anything higher than that. >>>> >>>> Setting --enable-kernel='' in glibc only specifies what >>>> compatibility to include in the glibc libraries. I have no >>>> problems with adjusting it, but think that 2.6.34 would be >>>> better. The only reason to not have --enable-kernel=current is to >>>> allow users to boot an LFS system with an older kernel. There >>>> appears to be a udev requirement for 2.6.34, so it would make >>>> sense to me that the --enable-kernel value should be the newer of >>>> the distros kernels and udev. Since udev needs 2.6.34, then the >>>> user shouldn't try to use the LFS system with a kernel older than >>>> that. >>>> >>> >>> Sure, do what you think is okay. I was thinking about the >>> >>> " --enable-kernel=2.6.25 >> >> OK, I'll change it to 2.6.34 >> > > Wouldn't be prudent in chapter 5 to set it to the running kernel, so > there is less probability of a glitch in chroot. Chapter 6 may be OK. You may have a point, but we are running the builds in Chapter 5 against the glibc we build in Chapter 5 and in Chapter 6 we are doing the same in chroot. All of these builds are using the same host kernel. I really doubt that gcc, make, and friends use something needed in a later kernel. For now lets leave the change the way it is in the commit I just made, but mentally bookmark the issue to see if it comes up. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
