OK. I see. Under the circumstances, would it be appropriate to release a LFS 6.0.1 to fix the problem? It sounds like it would only take a package update for binutils and perhaps a note.
Or perhaps just removing the LDFLAGS="-all-static" flag and associated comment?
-- Bruce
That's one of the options available to us. Drop one last release in the 6.x series, with updated toolchain to escape this issue.
The other option is to go ahead and get Ryan's cross-lfs prototype integrated, and utilize that.
Personally, if it was my decision, I'd go with one last release in the 6.x series in a month or two - Glibc 2.3.x, GCC 3.4.3, latest HJL binutils, and other updates. Otherwise, if we integrate cross-lfs now, that would certainly warrant a major version bump to 7.0...then when Glibc 2.4.x and GCC 4 roll around, that would warrant yet another major version bump. By doing an interim release in the 6.x tree, we can save all the major stuff for one huge release of 7.0 in 5-6 months (roughly).
My suggestion/preference is to do a quick 6.0.1 and release it this week. The only change is either one package version or some minor instruction changes. No change in gcc, glibc, or any other nice to have packages. Just the minimal needed to do 6.0 so that it does not require future upgrades to use workarounds.
-- Bruce
-- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
