Upgrading binutils, gcc and glibc

Ken Moffat zarniwhoop at ntlworld.com
Thu Jan 22 10:51:07 PST 2009


On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 07:00:39PM +0200, Angel Tsankov wrote:
> 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?
 I rebuilt *everything*, by following (or developing) the book.

> > discussed ].
> >
> Could you explain the purpose of the .config testing and 
> the --enable-kernel=current option?
> 
 If the kernel doesn't boot, it's much easier to find a working
.config in a full system with access to the net and probably a
graphical desktop (detailed google searches in a text-mode browser
are tedious).  Recently, I've discovered that building a
new system highlighted problems on one of my boxes (it was
horrendously slow), traced to a bad choice in the .config.
Fortunately, I noticed it in the early part of the build.

 The --enable-kernel=current option is for glibc.  Basically, it
doesn't add in workarounds in glibc for older kernels which didn't
have specific functions.  That means you might not be able to run an
older kernel (i.e. older than the latest that glibc knows about in
sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/kernel-features.h).  The thread started at
http://www.mail-archive.com/lfs-dev@linuxfromscratch.org/msg11054.html

ĸen
-- 
das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce



More information about the lfs-chat mailing list