On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 08:07:55PM -0400, Alan Feuerbacher wrote: > > I sucessfully installed an LFS system Version 7.6-rc1 as of Monday night, > using the previous release (SVN-20140831).
As a technical objection, 20140831 was svn, not 7.6-rc1. > On Tuesday I noticed this email, > and decided to try upgrading to the latest version (SVN-20140909). I > downloaded the packages mentioned in the Changelog (man-pages-3.72, upstream > patches to gcc, linux-3.16.2, util-linux-2.25.1, and also glibc-2.20 and its > associated patch (I double-checked the latest wget-list against the older > one to find this)). > > Next I recompiled the above in the order given in the LFS book, section 6. > First I installed the linux-3.16.2 headers, then man-pages-3.72, then > glibc-2.20. That compiled ok, but many tests failed. I went ahead and > installed it anyway. Then I compiled gcc-4.9.1 using the new upstream patch. > It compiled ok, but the tests immediately failed with this: > > WARNING: could not find 'runtest' > That message is _common_ on packages using dejagnu, and the tests normally run anyway. > This is my first attempt at installing some new updates over an older > installation. Am I missing something in the above steps? Do I need to go > back and recompile a lot of stuff to get the new programs to work? Perhaps > all the way back to the beginning of section 5? Or the beginning of section > 6? > > Alan For updating glibc, you are on your own - I know that Armin has done it in the past, I'm sure there are details in the list archives. The only generally-supported method of updating the LFS toolchain (binutils, gcc, glibc and, I suppose, the additions to gcc - mpc, mpfr, gmp) is to rebuild from the beginning of chapter 5. On an existing recent system: for the linux-3.16.2 headers, I would not bother updating (and in any case they should match what you compiled glibc against). For man-pages-3.72, it should just drop in like many other packages. For gcc I have no recent experience of using multiple versions - I think I used to put experimental versions into /opt so that I could control the PATH, but that doesn't really match your desire to move from stable 4.9.0 to newer stable 4.9.1. I suspect that some of the test packages are missing from your completed system - we build dejagnu, expect, tcl in chapter 5, and in a completed system /tools/bin should not be on your PATH. As always with test failures, the real question is "does the resulting system work?" and equally "can it build a newer system?". I am not sure that I would want to take the risk of either question failing, but then I have my own scripts (and one day they might even be error-free ;) - ultimately, it's your system and your rules. ĸen -- Nanny Ogg usually went to bed early. After all, she was an old lady. Sometimes she went to bed as early as 6 a.m. -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
