I've undertaken a review of my build scripts. Basically they're like the ones I used for 6.1 & 6.6, but I spent two weeks going through them one by one, the book open in my browser and nano in a VT, doing a C&P from the book into the function that does the build. That went in between when my package manager records what's already there, and it looks again after completing the build. I add "&&" to the end of every command so if any fail the script comes to a screeching halt, and I add the tee's for logs of the configure, make, and install steps. I'm not finding much.
I want the binaries to be built to run on lesser hardware than what I build on, of course, and some configures in the past have taken their -march from the hardware I build on. I don't want that to be a requirement! Consequently in the BLFS builds especially I have the following in root's environment and all BLFS scripts using configure specify CTARGET: export CHOST="i686-pc-linux-gnu" export CTARGET="i686-pc-linux-gnu" export CFLAGS="-march=i686" export CXXFLAGS="-march=i686" I remember admonitions from 6.1 about CFLAGS/CXXFLAGS, so those are specifically unset when building binutils/glibc/gcc. I looked, but 7.2 doesn't have the same admonitions. Are they still an issue? Can they be contaminating my build now? -- Paul Rogers [email protected] http://www.xprt.net/~pgrogers/ Rogers' Second Law: "Everything you do communicates." (I do not personally endorse any additions after this line. TANSTAAFL :-) -- http://www.fastmail.com - Send your email first class -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page Do not top post on this list. A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style
