On Mon, Jun 19, 2006 at 03:24:02PM -0700, Peter S. Meler wrote: > My apologizes for answering your email last :) I answered the > based on speed to answer. I'm thick skinned, even when I'm tetchy - no worries. > > >>> > > To which you have apparently produced your history for *this_step* > > This part of the answer tells me I must go further back in the process. > Since I have already done that twice, it was an attempt a avoidance > plain and simple. I started with CLFS-BOOK-20060506. At one of the > build failures I started over with SVN-20060614. >
No, I'm asking you to _review_ the whole chapter (but particularly the static gcc) to see if you think you missed any of it. You might also look at the patches to see if they match what shows up in your browser, it wouldn't be the first time somebody has downloaded the wrong patch and managed to save it in the name of hte patch they intended to download. > > > > And you didn't answer the alternative, although you appear to > > disagree with my assertion (hint - keep a note of what you copy, so > > that you can delete it after the test). > The answer was the "ls /tools" that was part of my reply. > I have no lib64. Ah. I wondered what that 'ls' was for. No, you would need to actually follow the multilib book to have a 64-bit library in /tools/lib64. What I meant was that at this point in gcc I believe it might be looking in a (non-existent) lib64 directory for the object it failed to find. > reiserfsprogs 3.6.19 - ok to use? In the email archive I saw a comment > that reiserfs 4 not ok. anyone? Reiser3 is probably safe enough now, although I've been bitten too much by it in the past to ever dream of using it (fortunately, it was only test data). Reiser4 is a total unknown, development seems to be happening away from lkml, and it looks to be hardly any closer to being merged. When you already have a problem, using an experimental filesystem with an uncommon architecture (1.) is probably not going to help your build. [ if you are enamoured with the idea of reiser4, there's no reason why you shouldn't leave some spare partitions, and then use those for reiser4 later (2.)] You might also find that reiser4 is not readable by lilo. Ken 1. Yes, I know everyman and his dog has an x86_64 now, but how many of them are using it for pure64 with a cutting-edge toolchain ? Not very many, most 'amd64' users are on debian or ubuntu. 2. And if you do that, you should probably monitor the namesys mailing list or #reiser4. -- das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce _______________________________________________ Clfs-support mailing list [email protected] http://ninja.linux-phreak.biz/mailman/listinfo/clfs-support
