Re: ICA

2005-12-18 Thread Jeremy Huntwork
Jeremy Huntwork wrote: This is nearly done, so I will go ahead and post results on this when I have them. As Greg has explained, this will at least show that the system can bootstrap itself and produce the same thing. That should have at least some merit. Here is the results via Farce:

Re: ICA

2005-12-18 Thread Jeremy Huntwork
Jeremy Huntwork wrote: Well, now to try Greg's method and see what we get. BTW, Dan, are you going to be running similar tests on the current LFS build method? -- JH -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above

Re: ICA

2005-12-18 Thread Ken Moffat
On Sun, 18 Dec 2005, Jeremy Huntwork wrote: There are 4 lines that, to me, stand out: unexpected FAIL: /usr/bin/libtool is different unexpected FAIL: /usr/bin/vim differs after stripping and processing unexpected FAIL: /usr/include/c++/4.0.2/i686-pc-linux-gnu/bits/stdc++.h.gch/O0g.gch is

Re: GCC-3.4.3 PCH backported patch

2005-12-18 Thread Jeremy Huntwork
Dan Nicholson wrote: Hi, In light of a some recent requests to lfs-support on this subject, I've decided to ping the list with this patch again. Perhaps we can note this in the errata for 6.1.1 and put the patch in the repository? -- JH --

Re: ICA

2005-12-18 Thread Dan Nicholson
On 12/18/05, Jeremy Huntwork [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jeremy Huntwork wrote: Well, now to try Greg's method and see what we get. BTW, Dan, are you going to be running similar tests on the current LFS build method? I think I will, just to see where it stacks up. I maintain scripts for

Re: GCC-3.4.3 PCH backported patch

2005-12-18 Thread Matthew Burgess
Jeremy Huntwork wrote: Dan Nicholson wrote: In light of a some recent requests to lfs-support on this subject, I've decided to ping the list with this patch again. Perhaps we can note this in the errata for 6.1.1 and put the patch in the repository? Agreed. Regards, Matt. --

Re: ICA

2005-12-18 Thread DJ Lucas
Ken Moffat wrote: The vim one puzzles me a bit. :/ Also, I'm hoping that the stdc++.h.gch differences are due to the randomness that Ken and Greg talked about. I think vim might be more of this c++ randomness I keep hearing randomness? Is this just a result of the kernel option (defalt

Re: ICA

2005-12-18 Thread Alexander E. Patrakov
Jeremy Huntwork wrote: unexpected FAIL: /usr/bin/vim differs after stripping and processing Looks like optional dependencies (perl library?) differ after chapters 5 and 6. It would be interesting to see differences in ./configure output and in config.log. -- Alexander E. Patrakov --