This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: Support installing headers for bootstrapping libgcc
- From: Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf at tilera dot com>
- To: Roland McGrath <roland at hack dot frob dot com>
- Cc: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>, <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 14:51:54 -0400
- Subject: Re: Support installing headers for bootstrapping libgcc
- References: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1203081626150.13862@digraph.polyomino.org.uk> <20120309190400.552E82C0A7@topped-with-meat.com> <Pine.LNX.4.64.1203092003130.16963@digraph.polyomino.org.uk> <20120323000616.32F372C08D@topped-with-meat.com> <Pine.LNX.4.64.1205111338290.15136@digraph.polyomino.org.uk> <20120511183752.0B1112C0BE@topped-with-meat.com>
On 5/11/2012 2:37 PM, Roland McGrath wrote:
> I think we can just get rid of sln entirely at this point. We really
> don't expect anybody to be able to run 'make install' directly on a
> live system and not ruin all sorts of things that might be needed
> somewhere in the process. So why should ln be different?
I have in fact found it handy to have sln installed on my live system. I
have at least once done an "ln -sf" to point /lib/libc.so.6 at a new
version and gotten it wrong, at which point you can't recover easily
without sln.
I don't think it's too unfortunate to have to build ldconfig and sln after
libgcc_eh is installed, as long as the procedure is clean and
well-documented, although I'd certainly much prefer a solution which
allowed them to be built in a single pass.
--
Chris Metcalf, Tilera Corp.
http://www.tilera.com