Robert Day zarin at
Sat Jan 3 07:29:22 PST 2004

This is where the long-term goal of a pre-built BootCd comes in handy -
the boot Cd can include a patched gcc and glibc.
In the mean time, would it make more sense to do this....

Assume we are going to simple modify LFS....
Building the /tools dir, we build glibc....  patch it here...
we also build gcc here, and patch it.....

Then after we chroot, we have a patched glibc and a patched, guarded
gcc...  NOW we build a new glibc that IS guarded.  Sensible?

   Rob Day (BOFH)

On Sat, 2004-01-03 at 10:17, Archaic wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 03, 2004 at 06:21:07AM -0500, ashes wrote:
> > 
> > Glibc has to be patched first, followed by gcc, but the first glibc won't be 
> > guarded.
> Here's a scenario, then, assuming a fully built LFS is already in place
> and we have rebooted into it; Start chapter 6 like normal, patching
> glibc. Skip the toolchain adjusting as we already did that, build
> binutils, build patched gcc (bootstrap if necessary). At this point my
> concern is that should glibc be built again now that gcc has been
> patched? If we do rebuild glibc, I think it's a given that binutils and
> gcc need rebuilt, but iteration testing may be in order.
> -- 
> Archaic
> The IRS has become morally corrupted by the enormous power which we in
> Congress have unwisely entrusted to it. Too often it acts like a Gestapo
> preying upon defenseless citizens.
> - Senator Edward V. Long

More information about the hlfs-dev mailing list