why the chroot phase of uclibc weren't patched like the previous toolchain?

naruto canada narutocanada at gmail.com
Fri Nov 16 04:28:15 PST 2007


On 11/16/07, naruto canada <narutocanada at gmail.com> wrote:
> hi
>
> why the chroot phase of uclibc weren't patched like the previous toolchain?
> was it because too many packages wouldn't build? or maybe it has
> already those features?

My fault, I was thinking about the gcc patches, uclibc weren't patched as much.
Gee, that must have been a traumatic experience to see 7 patches in one go.

>
> thanks.
>



More information about the hlfs-dev mailing list