Upgrading binutils, gcc and glibc

Angel Tsankov fn42551 at fmi.uni-sofia.bg
Thu Jan 22 09:00:39 PST 2009

Ken Moffat wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 10:16:47AM +0200, Angel Tsankov wrote:
>> Has anyone tried to upgrade binutils, gcc and glibc from versions
>> 2.15,
>> 3.4.3 and 2.3.4 respectively to more recent versions?  If so, in
>> what steps did you do it?
> Well, back when I was running those versions, I upgraded to
> the next versions, so at that stage it wouldn't have been anything
> newer than 2.16.1, 4.0.3, 2.3.6 ( I no longer have notes from that
> far back ).
Did you first upgrade binutils, gcc or glibc? And which of these packages 
came second?
> But whichever version I'm upgrading from, the process
> is always the same - rebuild everything:
> (i) Upgrade to the new kernel.  Arguably, this is optional, but it
> allows me to test the .config on the old system, and then I can
> choose --enable-kernel=current when I build the new glibc.  [ Maybe
> not a worthwhile switch, opinions were divided when this was last
> discussed ].
Could you explain the purpose of the .config testing and 
the --enable-kernel=current option?

> (ii.) Build LFS (so, you need a spare filesystem - I keep several on
> my desktop boxes, and they share /home).
Yes, a spare filesystem is probably the best way to go.  And sharing "/home" 
seems to fit very well.

> (iii.) Based on which packages you built for the current system,
> build everything else (BLFS and anything else you use).
Yep, I'm already aware that I won't do without a full rebuild every time I 
upgrade a "core" package like these.


More information about the lfs-chat mailing list