jhalfs HLFS Paco patch

Tor Olav Stava t-ol-sta at online.no
Fri Mar 17 01:17:48 PST 2006

Dan Nicholson wrote:

>On 3/16/06, Tor Olav Stava <t-ol-sta at online.no> wrote:
>>+    # UGLY, but will avoid using Paco up to linux-libc-headers
>I don't know if you considered this.  In my scripts, I install paco at
>the end of the /tools stage (Ch. 5).  Then I add
>/usr/lib/libpaco-log.so -> /tools/lib/libpaco-log.so to Creating
>Essential Symlinks and let the paco binary be found through the PATH. 
>Then I can start using it immediately in the final system, without
>altering what LD_PRELOAD gets set to at any point.  I then reinstall
>paco at the end of the final system.
>Just a thought.
I did actually consider it, but it won't help me get rid of that "ugly" 
if statement. I need to avoid the first few scripts in chapter06, as 
some of them won't create any log for Paco, and thus it will fail trying 
to parse a nonexistent logfile.

My reason for installing in beginning of Ch06, was that I didn't want to 
install Paco twice as it seemed unnecessary. You do have a very good 
point, though, because installing Paco before adjusting the toolchain in 
ch06 will make it link against /tools, and won't work after the /tools 
dir is removed.
Thanks for your thought.
It seems I have to do it the way you suggest. Under any circumstance I 
can't avoid installing Paco twice. It still needs to be reinstalled 
after the toolchain have been readjusted in Ch06 to make it work on the 
final system.

So I'm back for another hack ;)

That's why I appreciate feedback. I probably wouldn't have noticed that 
until I'd removed the /tools dir and tried to log packages from BLFS.

Tor Olav

More information about the alfs-discuss mailing list