Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:

> Greg Schafer wrote:
>> Confirmed. I've just reproduced it here. I'll send a note upstream and try
>> to get an explanation as to why it affects only x86_64.
> 
> Many thanks. Could you please keep lfs-dev informed about your further 
> communication with upstream?

Sure. The thread starts here and is quite interesting and features input
from the usual toolchain gurus:

http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2007-08/msg00198.html

In summary, it basically confirms everything we already knew and also what
I've been saying all along here on lfs-dev. ie:

  -  it's an x86_64 binutils-2.17 bug
  -  binutils devs are reluctant to fix bugs in old releases
  -  hash-style is supposed to be back-compatible
  -  a 2 line patch works around the problem

The facts are, our current native build method relies on the ability to
link against the host libc with the target ld. There is nothing inherently
wrong with this approach because it should always work in typical LFS
build scenarios (barring bugs of course). Yes, it would probably be better
if we could avoid it somehow, but the build method would need to change
radically in order to achieve this - cross compilation, gross hacks,
whatever. If someone can come up with something sane (and tasteful!) that
works, great, let's look at it. But I'm not holding my breath..

At the risk of dredging up old flamewars, I'd be very reluctant myself to
involve cross compilation in a mainstream build method. It's all been said
before, but I'll repeat just this point - IMHO cross compilation is a
specialty niche area that is not at all well suited to the relatively
simple task of building a new Linux system for Joe Sixpack (typical LFS
audience). It *is* complicated and relatively few folks understand it.

And finally, Alex, you should be more careful with what you write. Making
wild and flagrant comments doesn't help anyone. You already have a
reputation for jumping to (sometimes wrong) conclusions so please just put
a little more thought into your postings. BTW, Alex, I would like to see
from you a clear set of guidelines listing all the possible bugs and
problems in the LFS LiveCD, even the ones you haven't discovered yet (just
joking!  See? Hopefully now you'll realise how ridiculous one of your
postings in this thread was.

Regards
Greg
-- 
http://www.diy-linux.org/

-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page