Re: [lfs-dev] SVN-20180612, Nth gcc-8.1.0 Unstable?, path to solution

2018-06-18 Thread Jean-Marc Pigeon 

Hello

On 06/18/2018 01:35 AM, Jean-Marc Pigeon wrote:
[...]



So we have 3 options:
- I am not  analyzing correctly cmake failure to compile and
   my finding can't be reproduce (I am wrong in some way).

- GCC configuration (as provided by LFS) make no identical
   binaries, it depend on its compilation context.

- Problem stand in cmake itself, but this is not detected by
   compiler in chapter-06 context.


[..]


Problem is proved (100%) to be related to contents of
/usr/include/c++/8.1.0
(and only to this contents)

I have made a diff, gcc-blfs come with 23 "extra" files
as extracted by diff.

Here they are:
 > usr/include/c++/8.1.0/bits/gthr-single.h
 > usr/include/c++/8.1.0/bits/c++config.h
 > usr/include/c++/8.1.0/bits/c++locale.h
 > usr/include/c++/8.1.0/bits/stdtr1c++.h
 > usr/include/c++/8.1.0/bits/c++io.h
 > usr/include/c++/8.1.0/bits/cxxabi_tweaks.h
 > usr/include/c++/8.1.0/bits/basic_file.h
 > usr/include/c++/8.1.0/bits/gthr.h


[...]

Tracking extra file generation origin proved
"I am wrong in some way".  Yuppie!!

Indeed I was recompiling gcc according LFS directive, but I have 
overlook the fact in the same shell script I was doing a

../libstdc++-v3/configure
and a
make (libstdc++-v3) install.

So it seems, doing so, I have compromised gcc code itself.

This is a misunderstanding of mine, believing
gcc and libstdc++v3 to be 2  different package
even if there are coming from the same
source tree.
To indulge myself and to find and excuse, this same mistake was in
my 8.1 and 8.2 and never show up

Let me double-check finding and understanding, may
be I can come up with some suggestions for the
LFS book.

Many Thanks for all your advice.


--

A bientôt
===
Jean-Marc PigeonE-Mail: j...@safe.ca
SAFE Inc. Phone: (514) 493-4280
   Clement, 'a kiss solution' to get rid of SPAM (at last)
  Clement' Home base <"http://www.clement.safe.ca";>
===




smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
-- 
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: [lfs-dev] Duplicated sections in sysvinit version

2018-06-18 Thread Xi Ruoyao 
On 2018-06-08 10:27 -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> On 06/08/2018 09:55 AM, Xi Ruoyao wrote:
> > In sysvinit version, sections 7.6.3.1 and 7.6.3.2 (in usage.xml) are
> > the duplication of 7.3.2.2 and 7.3.2.3 (in udev.xml).
> > 
> > I think we should remove 7.6.3.1 and 7.6.3.2, and put a  to
> > 7.3.2.2 here.
> 
> Good catch.  I'll do that at my next LFS update in the next week or so.

Now "Module Loading" is commented out.  But the next section
"Handling Hotpluggable/Dynamic Devices" still duplicates the
same content in udev.xml.
-- 
Xi Ruoyao 
School of Aerospace Science and Technology, Xidian University
-- 
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: [lfs-dev] Duplicated sections in sysvinit version

2018-06-18 Thread Bruce Dubbs 

On 06/18/2018 02:28 PM, Xi Ruoyao wrote:

On 2018-06-08 10:27 -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:

On 06/08/2018 09:55 AM, Xi Ruoyao wrote:

In sysvinit version, sections 7.6.3.1 and 7.6.3.2 (in usage.xml) are
the duplication of 7.3.2.2 and 7.3.2.3 (in udev.xml).

I think we should remove 7.6.3.1 and 7.6.3.2, and put a  to
7.3.2.2 here.


Good catch.  I'll do that at my next LFS update in the next week or so.


Now "Module Loading" is commented out.  But the next section
"Handling Hotpluggable/Dynamic Devices" still duplicates the
same content in udev.xml.


OK, I moved the comment close to include that section too.

  -- Bruce


--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page