what exactly means "Installation Dependencies"?
dagmar at speakeasy.net
dagmar at speakeasy.net
Mon Oct 7 10:33:12 PDT 2002
On Mon, 7 Oct 2002, Hannes Birnbacher wrote:
> have the LFS4 book and, after some problems, started to look into
> matters thoroughly.
> So I sucessfully compiled binutils-2.13 (static, following
> Chapter 5) but I have the impression that one file was missing. I
> therefore checked if all the files mentioned under "Binutils
> Installation Dependencies" were present in my host distribution
> (SuSE 7.3). I found out that Autoconf: autoconf, autoheader, and
> Automake: aclocal, automake weren't there. All the others, when I
> called them by typing, for example: "ar --version", answered with
> their version number and there was mentioned SuSE in the version
> string, so I am sure they are from my host distribution.
I'm a little confused by the way you phrased things, because if you're
operating from _within_ the static build environment, then _one_ of those
binaries should be the ones built by SuSe. Possibly you need to be
As to the automake, autoheader, etc stuff... Those are autoconf-2.54,
automake-1.6 (1.7 is out and should work okay), and libtool-1.4.2 (plus
some patches you MUST apply if you use that version) that the configure
scripts are looking for. They're not even partially necessary at this
point, so don't worry about them.
> Now how is it possible that almost all binutil files from LFS
> were successfully compiled, without any error message, when some
> files mentioned as "Installation Dependencies" are missing in my
> host distribution? Are they
> - necessary not for installing binutils, but for running
> binutils, or
> - will they become necessary when re-compiling it dynamically, or
> - will only a part of the binutils files be created, leaving out
> some which would have needed, for example, autoconf, which would
> explain my problem with the one missing file after compiling
This would fall under the heading of "borrowing troubles". If you follow
the build directions on creating the static build environment correctly,
and everything completes it's own builds without crashing violently, then
you can probably attribute any pieces you thought were missing to
misinterpretation of the text. If you really want to know for sure
whether you need something that you don't have that's listed in the book
as something you need at that point, then ask the list about it. It'll
either be something you really do need, or it'll be a typo that someone
> As I do have no professional training in Linux/Unix, I think I
> had better understand what I read very exactly so I would be
> grateful for any help.
> The main problem, "where is the missing file and why is ist
> missing", has been asked by me in an other posting today so
> please do not bother to ask which file was it.
A LOT of questions get asked on the list. This statement still leaves the
issue so vague as to be useless.
Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
and put 'unsubscribe lfs-support' in the subject header of the message
More information about the lfs-support