On Mon, 13 Mar 2017 17:58:58 -0700 Paul Rogers <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Well, I *think* you can do that. The ways I've done it in the past > have worked. But I've been careful of basic hardware, MoBo/CPU, > compatibility. I've got an LFS-6.1(?) made for a i586 on a K6/2, 6.6 > for a i686 on a Via C7, 7.7 for i7 on a Core2 (in x86-64 modes, and > i686 modes). > > But you already made your LFS every step of the way. It's YOUR "ready- > made" system! I wouldn't call that cheating. Suppose you needed to > cross a river, so built yourself a bridge. Would it be cheating to > use it the second time you crossed, or do you build yourself a > second one? ;) > > You should be careful of the setup and post-compile configuration steps. > > -- > Paul Rogers > [email protected] > Rogers' Second Law: "Everything you do communicates." > (I do not personally endorse any additions after this line. TANSTAAFL :-) I followed my original plan and completed the glibc build yesterday. It proved unexpectedly difficult. I had two segfaults, the first time in configure and the second in make. I have never seen those before. The third time it went to completion. It seems there is after all some subtle incompatibility between something in the toolkit and the Via Nano processor it is running on. I suspect either glibc or one of the gcc libraries; I can't imagine any other software being that sensitive to architecture. glibc tests showed 9 errors: the two expected ones on getaddr(4,5), 4 maths errors (also expected on a non-intel processor), csu/test-multiarch (which also appeared in LFS7.8 so it seems to be expected on a Via Nano) and 2 new ones: npH/tst-create-detached and iconvdata/iconv-test. There were also two unexpected passes! I got an automated message this morning about posts bouncing from my gmail account. Turns out they were all from a bot! Good old gmail didn't let them through. -- H Russman -- 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
