On Sun, 28 Jun 2020 19:41:20 +0200 Frans de Boer <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 28-06-2020 14:07, Scott Andrews wrote: > > On Sun, 28 Jun 2020 13:42:10 +0200 > > Frans de Boer <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> LS, > >> > >> Currently, the previous chapter 5 has been split into 3 separate > >> chapters. It is obvious why the new chapter 7 exists. > >> However, chapter 5 and 6 are a bit puzzling. There are no extra > >> actions between chapter 6 and 5, in fact one could argue that 5 > >> and 6 can be fussed together. > >> > >> The only reason I can think of to explain the separation between > >> chapter 5 and 6, is that chapter 5 provides the basic building > >> blocks to compile the remaining of chapter 6. Which can be reused > >> if (some of) chapter 6 needs a rebuild. After all, the next step > >> is a different architecture where this approach can be used. > >> That said, if the compiler or glibc is chanced, one has to rebuild > >> chapter 5 anyhow. Looking at the packages in chapter 6, there is > >> just only 2x extra time involved to compile them. Especially when > >> there is no testing done, as was possible under the previous > >> releases. > >> > >> Maybe one could explain this a little deeper? > >> > > Sorry to high jack you thread, not my intention, only to comment on > > this new warp in the space continuum. > > > > I have looked at this "new version" way of building LFS and I > > believe it will create many issues for me as someone that uses a > > package manager. I also so see no real advantage over the old > > way. I also use the overlay file system for the kernel so when > > building chapter 6 (old way) only /tools is present in the "host" > > file system along with all the scripts etc that I use to build LFS. > > The "host" that I used to build the tool chain is completely > > removed. I don't like mixing the tool chain into the root file > > system ( yes I know in the old way some links are needed). I will > > continue with using the old way, and I think it is time for me to > > split from the LFS project and go my own way. > > Sorry Scott, I see no package manager in de re-styled LFS. Just as in > the previous version, there is some talk about a package manager, but > that is it, just highlighting the differences and/or possibilities. I use a package manager and the changes made severely impact anyone using a package manager. As in the new changes make using a package manager very difficult. I see little to no benefit for the pain induced. I would rather go to the dentist and get 32 teeth drilled with out Novocain than to "update" to this new process. > > Don't forget that the project is to assist others in building their > own basic linux system. As the world continues, we must take into > account that different architectures will be come into demand. Using > a textbook example for cross-compiling is a start. In fact, this > layout has benefits over the previous versions in that we don't have > all kind of workarounds to build things and paves the way for future > LFS's. > My builds are for the ARM platform and I build 32 bit systems on a 64 bit platform. This "new" version only causes me grief and at the end of the day the product is the same. No different just more grief. All thou I do make some mods on host the build system is constructed Once chroot into the "BUILD" chroot it is all by the book, until now. Mixing /tools and the root filesystem by way of DESTDIR causes a great amount of distruction. The only "advantage" I see is not having to "adjust the toolchain" at the risk of greatly enhanced way of killing the host system I have zero work a rounds to take version 9.0 or 9.1 and build it on the ARM platform so I am at a loss to see your benefits. I only need to change the flags and add platform info and the build goes exactly to the book. You have even whacked the PiLFS project as they are somewhat stuck on the devel version just prior to this "NEW" mess. Nothing new has been posted to their site in a while unless it just happened today. I tried using the new enhanced version and it failed, I concluded that the changes needing to by made and then debugging the "build" scripts far out paced any good. Looks like you "systemded" LFS -- 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
