Am Samstag, den 27.01.2018, 21:33 +0000 schrieb Ken Moffat: > Now that libelf from elfutils is in the development version of LFS, I > think we no-longer need elfutils in BLFS ? Originally it was added > for Mesa and I see that we recommend it for the radeonsi driver > there. I say "I think" because my current build (with gcc-7.3.0) > seems to have successfully built the mesa radeonsi lib, but that > machine uses plain old radeon so I can't use the radeonsi stuff. > > Other users are glib2 (it found it) and systemd (in LFS that comes > after libelf). > > As with python3, libffi, etc this may cause transitional pain for > people building on less-current versions of LFS (I think libelf was > added in the past month), so I propose that IF we do this, we do it > after the freeze for 8.2 and explain it in the ChangeLog. > > Unless somebody has a reason why full elfutils should remain in > BLFS, of course. ... > > ĸen > -- > Truth, in front of her huge walk-in wardrobe, selected black leather > boots with stiletto heels for such a barefaced truth. > - Unseen Academicals
Just my 2ct: The current instructions to build libelf are very basic and limited to build only the lib. At least a comment about the tools should be added as well as note about the --program-prefix when one is going to install the full package. Something like "If you require the full set of elfutils, execute as root $ make install otherwise it's sufficient to install only the library by executing $ make -C libelf install $ install -vm644 config/libelf.pc /usr/lib/pkgconfig" The --program-prefix="eu-" could be added to the configure command anyhow and would prepare the build process to be fine in case one will go to build the whole stuff. If only installing the lib, it does not harm at all. -- Thomas -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
