On Mon, Sep 18, 2006 at 07:13:27PM -0400, Joe Ciccone wrote: > I tested the in kernel headers on mips/alpha/sparc. There were a lot of > problems. silo and aboot didn't want to build right. The build had so > many errors in it, on all 3 of the archs, That I just walked away. I did > have a succesful build on x86 and x86_64. I didn't test arm or hppa. > Joe, thanks for this datapoint. It's comments like this that make me glad I've only got a limited variety of hardware. (/me recalls how long it took to get a working config for my ibook on ARCH=powerpc).
You might expect me to say that I'll prioritise testing on ppc64, but since I haven't yet managed a full desktop on it (even with linux-libc-headers) I'm not desperate to try that. More on-topic for this list, x86 now has two reports of successful builds. Maybe LFS should reclaim its 'bleeding edge' position and switch to the 2.6.18 headers as soon as the new kernel is out, then let people here and in BLFS find out if anything is broken in use ? After all, x86 is "common as muck" so if things don't work there, they probably don't work at all ;) Ken -- das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
