Randy McMurchy wrote:
Tushar, what is the harm in bootstrapping?
What's the point? You guys have always said that BLFS *expects* a certain base of LFS. In fact you've got gcc4 patches now all over the place in BLFS SVN because you *expect* that the user will have a development version of LFS installed already. The only reason to bootstrap that I can see is when you're uncertain about the condition of the host machine and/or whether or not gcc will be able to compile itself cleanly.
What's more, if I'm understanding this correctly, gcc already uses some sort of checking in its default 'make'. First it builds a temporary compiler, 'xgcc' then it proceeds to build the rest with of gcc with that compiler it's just built.
Just my opinion, but I think it's a unnecessary cycles wasted in BLFS. If BLFS were an independent book, to be used on just any distro out there, it might be a different story.
-- JH -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
