On 31/01/2018 18:57, Thomas Trepl wrote: > Am Mittwoch, den 31.01.2018, 18:48 +0100 schrieb Pierre Labastie: >> On 31/01/2018 18:16, thomas wrote: >>> Hi all, >>> >>> does (B)LFS "officially" support i686 platforms or did we silently >>> drop >>> 32-bit? There were a few comments about this question in Sept/Oct >>> last year as >>> Bruce brought this up. I cannot find a final decision. >>> >>> I ask this question because of the issue occured by upgrading >>> binutils to 2.30 >>> with which grub2 cannot be compiled [1]. Since there are no other >>> complains >>> than from i686 systems, it looks like that this issue does not >>> occur on x86_64 >>> systems. If LFS supports 32bit, shouldn't we then refuse upgrading >>> packages to >>> version which do not compile on all platforms? >>> >>> I know, there is that good feeling of living on the bleeding edge - >>> but what >>> does make us feel that we have to have the most recent version in >>> the book? >>> The intention of the book is to show how things work - that can be >>> pretty much >>> achieved with not-that-new version too. This allows us to stay on a >>> previous >>> version if the new one does not work proper. Making a comment in >>> the package's >>> chapter why this is not upgraded to the last version right now >>> should be >>> sufficient. >>> >>> Yes, there may be security issues fixed in newer versions. But is >>> that that >>> much relevant for a LFS system where we hardly care about security >>> fixes? >>> >>> Personally, i do recompiling LFS on 32bit for some of my older >>> machines. It's >>> as fast as for 64bit as I'm doing it in a VM (which is not realy >>> much slower >>> than bare metal). So compile time isn't that important to me, i >>> think its not >>> an argument at all. I'd be kind of sad if 32bit support would be >>> dropped. >>> >>> Whats your opinion? >> >> Looks like all the devs (except you maybe) only compile on x86_64, so >> 32-bit >> support has not been dropped, but it is much less tested. For the >> binutils >> issue, have you tried my suggestion on support? >> >> Pierre > > Yes, I placed a message on the grub-bug-list with a lot of logs (see > link http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-grub/2018-01/msg00006.html). > > To my text above, to make long text short: Shouldn't we downgrade to > binutils-2.29.1 for a while (until a fix comes up somehow)? >
Sorry, I meant "my suggestion in my answer to the other Thomas on lfs-support". You may want to try adding two flags to binutils' configure: --enable-64-bit-bfd --enable-targets=x86-64 Note that maybe only one of those is needed, and also I am not sure whether it should be x86-64 or x86_64... Pierre -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
