On 9/6/2009 5:08 PM, Ken Moffat wrote: > 2009/9/6 Marcus Wanner <[email protected]>: > > >> Ok, thanks! >> It would be annoying to have to rebuild everything just to get a new >> compiler... >> One more question: >> Would it be a bad idea to build and install new versions >> binutils/gcc/glibc alongside the old ones, so any statically-linked >> programs built with the old ones will still have the correct versions of >> their libraries, but the new ones can be used to compile new programs? >> >> Marcus >> > > I don't have a problem with installing parallel toolchains, > I've done it in the past to try out a newer compiler > (so, only binutils and gcc, this was before gmp and mpfr > were required) - in a different $PREFIX. I don't think it's > sensible to try to install multiple versions of glibc. > Thanks for the pointer about glibc. > But, I think you misunderstand my point about static > libs : linking to these happens when a package is built. > After that, the required functions are part of the > executable program, not picked up at run-time. > Yeah, I got static and dynamically linked programs backwards. Oops. > If the system is being built only for the learning > experience, it doesn't really matter. If you want to > use it for real, 6.5 should be a lot better than 6.3 > (disclaimer - I still haven't built 6.5, sorting out my > upgraded desktop is taking a very long time). > > ĸen > I'm actually planning on using it for real; I'm trying to build a custom minimal OS for some older hardware (Pentium IV 2ghz, nvidia GEforce 3).
Thanks for all your help :) Marcus -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
