On 6/2/10, Paul Rogers <[email protected]> wrote: > To be a proper "trailer" you need to have a system with ONLY the > minimum requirements for the book. Otherwise you aren't proving > building will work with only those.
I don't think you will find any volunteers to perform the intricate and time-consuming labor. This is partly because the releases move forward fast enough to discourage volunteers. I loaded up a LFS-6.2 system (love rsync) and it exceeds minimum requirements for 6.6 except for the kernel. It does not meet requirements for DEV. While configuring a kernel, just for fun, I saw this: CONFIG_CC_OPTIMIZE_FOR_SIZE: x x Enabling this option will pass "-Os" instead of "-O2" to gcc x resulting in a smaller kernel. x x WARNING: some versions of gcc may generate incorrect code with this x option. If problems are observed, a gcc upgrade may be needed. x x If unsure, say N. x and that made me wonder. We may never know for sure exactly what caused the original problem "undefined reference to __stack_chk_guard" which seems to surface from time to time. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
