Hello, On 06/19/2018 10:30 AM, Xi Ruoyao wrote:
On 2018-06-19 09:45 -0400, Jean-Marc Pigeon wrote:A) rename: Libstdc++-8.1.0 -> GCC-8.1.0-pass2 GCC-8.1.0-pass2 -> GCC-8.1.0-pass3There is no libstdc++ package as such (all other entries use package name), in chapter 6 libstdc++ is generated by a standard GCC build. I think this suggestion improve understanding about libstdc++ and GCC intrinsinc link.In the libstdc++ section we DON'T build GCC. We only build libstdc++. This should not be a "GCC pass". I think we can use "GCC-8.1.0 C++ Runtime Library" just like "Linux-4.17.1 API Headers".
Agreed, good idea.
6. Installing Basic System Software A) After MPC and before GCC rebuilding add entries for: TCL expect dejagnu. GCC "make -k check" need those packages to do it and use the one in /tools (generated in chapter 5) but not yet available from chapter 6 (I think this not consistent)."Note that the Tcl package used here is a minimal version needed to run the LFS tests. For the full package, see the BLFS Tcl procedures." BLFS: <http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/systemd/general/tcl.html> Full tcl installation needs to edit {tcl,tdbc,itcl}Config.sh with a lot of "sed ...". I don't think we should do that in LFS.
This is interesting. IMHO LFS should be a stable starting point. This mean once /tools removed, we should be able to redo chapter-6 again without trouble or missing components (chapter-6 being the very very minimal stage to a Linux OS duplication process). So in bootstrap phase (chapter-5) we can have a striped down tcl. But by the end of chapter-6 we should have fully functional TCL (plus expect, dejagnu). we (we: stand for all Unix packages contributors) have a big stratification problem (./configure make us extremely sensitive to compilation context). This TCL question may be an example. Asking to an upstream editor, "what is your packages level within Unix components layering?" will often give a puzzling answer. To come back about TCL, as it is needed by LFS chapter-6, it should be part of LFS and "fully" functional. so we should move it/them from BLFS to LFS.
B) After Xz building, add an entry like the one "Adjusting the Toolchain" saying "Removing /tools", to mark the fact the bootstrap process is now fully completed and build system is now fully self-sufficient.No. The temporary tools would be used in "Stripping Again". In "Cleaning Up" it's mentioned: "The reason for this is that the programs in /tools are no longer needed. For this reason you can delete the /tools directory if so desired." Maybe we can make this more explicit: Now the system is fully self-sufficient. We can remove the temporary tools now: <screen><userinput>rm -rf /tools</userinput></screen>
I was not sure doing this after Xz, was late enough. removing /tools in "Stripping Again" is good enough to me, it show a clear switch from bootstrap to autonomous mode.
-- A bientôt =========================================================== Jean-Marc Pigeon E-Mail: [email protected] SAFE Inc. Phone: (514) 493-4280 Clement, 'a kiss solution' to get rid of SPAM (at last) Clement' Home base <"http://www.clement.safe.ca";> ===========================================================
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
-- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
