On Wed, 2013-02-27 at 22:45 +0100, Frans de Boer wrote: > By the way, I looked at the CLFS site and see that things are not that > different only that they are a couple of versions behind. That said, I > think I will try sometime their ideas and incorporated it with the > running LFS.
Yeah, if you understand what the book is actually doing, it's not too hard to mix and match the two. I'm currently running an LFS system patched to avoid the lib64 symlinks, based on ideas pulled from the CLFS books. But if you want a multilib system, your best bet is to do the opposite - start with CLFS, and use LFS for advice on how to build newer versions of the various packages. Simon. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
