On 6/7/07, Ken Moffat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 07, 2007 at 07:12:37AM -0700, Dan Nicholson wrote: > > On 6/7/07, Tijnema <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > So, if you want to upgrade the core components > > > (Kernel+headers+glibc(+gcc?)), in which order would you install them? > > > > Gcc and binutils can be updated whenever you want, AFAIK. The kernel, > > definitely whenever you want. But the headers and glibc should move in > > lockstep. If you did more than a patchlevel upgrade of glibc, you'd > > probably want to rebuild most everything. > > > I pretty much go along with Dan here - I upgrade the kernel > whenever I have time (in my case, I'm normally running test > kernels). I have been known to try extra versions of gcc, and very > occasionally binutils, in /opt/newtools or somewhere else out of the > way. These days, I don't usually see any great reason to upgrade > gcc, other than "somebody put a new version into LFS or clfs". The > big difference is that I don't bother with patchlevel upgrades of > glibc for a running system. Ever. If I feel the need to upgrade > glibc, I'll rebuild everything (having my own buildscripts for blfs > helps ;). > > I've got old systems lying around (mostly, they only take 3 or 4 GB > - I share /home on its own fs, everything else except /boot is on a > single and distinct filesystem - you can tell I don't build space > hogs like OOo), so I can go back to them if I want to. Generally, > after 3 to 9 months I'll build a new system. Occasionally it > doesn't fly, and gets trashed (mostly, I catch these in test > builds). More usually, I'll build my full desktop (for gnome I > typically go through one or two major versions each year, for the > parts I use) and that becomes a current system. > > I've got four desktop boxes available for normal use, one is dead > slow and x86 only, one is ppc|ppc64, and the other two run x86 or > some flavour of x86_64 according to how I'm feeling. All my mail, > sourcecode, photos, and sound live on a 'server' box. Having a KVM > switch helps. In the past, I had one regular box, and another for > test builds. > > Summary: If I want to upgrade the core, I build a new LFS or a new > clfs. > > ĸen > --
Ok, thanks you both for your replies, i would expect the headers to be upgraded together with the kernel. But, you both say that a complete reinstall is recommended when upgrading Glibc, but I guess you both don't have Graphical desktop (X+KDE) and heavy programs (OOo) installed? I mean, if I upgrade glibc from 2.5 to 2.6, should I reinstall X, KDE, OOo and about 500 optional dependencies for X and KDE?? If so, I won't even think of upgrading glibc :P Tijnema -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
