Ok let's start
afay at pop.ma.ultranet.com
Thu Jun 22 15:38:12 PDT 2000
>> As for the CD issue, I think that the base programs should be
>> statically. Linking dynamically would just add time to the project
>> (figuring out which libraries are needed) and aren't most people
>> to recompile those programs anyway?
>People are going to recompile things yes, you don't want to simply
>files from the cd to LFS. You want to compile them onto LFS (makes a
>difference). So if you have static programs on the cd that you use to
>compile programs with, you definitely need a chroot environment
>you need Glibc to compile programs dynamically. CDROM system has no
>Glibc so the only way to get your root file system to contain Glibc
>files is to make $LFSby using root - chroot.
Well, personally I would like the choice on whether or not you want to
copy over the static binaries. Once I have the scripts up and running,
I don't want to have the system slow down because it is loading
programs from cdrom. I'd rather copy all of the static binaries to the
partition first (do something for 10 minutes while this is going on)
and then start the scripts so that my system is a bit more responsive.
And just so that there is no confusion, I would recompile those
binaries and get rid of the static ones after everything is finished.
Oh, and now I see the purpose of the chroot (wasn't thinking right
before). Below is the process I would like to see.
1.) boot from the cd or diskette
2.) copy static binaries and source to the hd
3.) chroot to the hd
4.) start compiling
Mail archive: http://www.pcrdallas.com/mail-archives/alfs-discuss
IRC access: server: irc.linuxfromscratch.org port: 6667 channel: #LFS
Unsubscribe: email alfs-discuss-request at linuxfromscratch.org and put
"unsubscribe" (without the quotation marks) in the body of the message
(no subject is required)
More information about the alfs-discuss