sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List
List archive
Re: [SM-Discuss] Wrong build order for: linux headers + binutils + gcc + glibc
- From: Ismael Luceno <ismael.luceno AT gmail.com>
- To: seth AT swoolley.homeip.net
- Cc: sm-discuss <sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org>
- Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] Wrong build order for: linux headers + binutils + gcc + glibc
- Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 01:04:24 -0300
seth AT swoolley.homeip.net escribió:
> On Tue, Nov 21, 2006 at 10:36:58PM -0300, Ismael Luceno wrote:
...
>> I explained it better in other e-mail.
>>
>> Of course I can do it manually, and I did, but it will be nice to have
>> sorcery to do it for me :).
>>
>> I know, maybe it's not suitable for 'sorcery rebuild', but could be
>> added as another command.
>>
>> The only thing that I think should be done in that way is the
>> toolchain, because it's desirable to have the system rebuilt with
>> the newer version of gcc.
>
> Generally, updates are done before you do a rebuild. That's why nobody
> asks for this feature. Somebody might upgrade to the next version of
> stable (which is when toolchains are updated so we can predictably QA
> it), and then rebuild. People don't update the grimoire and then
> rebuild hoping the combination upgrade/rebuild is going to be good. Or,
> if they do, they are asking for trouble.
>
> I'm just saying toolchains tend to be sorted out before rebuilds, and
> with our update process, it tends to be a non-issue.
That's a good point, although I think it will be a nice feature anyway,
because updating an entire system is a very time consuming task,
and rebuilding too, so it's better to avoid compiling things twice
whenever possible.
-
[SM-Discuss] Wrong build order for: linux headers + binutils + gcc + glibc,
Ismael Luceno, 11/18/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Wrong build order for: linux headers + binutils + gcc + glibc,
seth, 11/19/2006
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Wrong build order for: linux headers + binutils + gcc + glibc, Ismael Luceno, 11/19/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Wrong build order for: linux headers + binutils + gcc + glibc,
Andrew Stitt, 11/19/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Wrong build order for: linux headers + binutils + gcc + glibc,
Ismael Luceno, 11/21/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Wrong build order for: linux headers + binutils + gcc + glibc,
seth, 11/21/2006
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Wrong build order for: linux headers + binutils + gcc + glibc, Ismael Luceno, 11/21/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Wrong build order for: linux headers + binutils + gcc + glibc,
seth, 11/21/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Wrong build order for: linux headers + binutils + gcc + glibc,
Ismael Luceno, 11/21/2006
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Wrong build order for: linux headers + binutils + gcc + glibc,
seth, 11/19/2006
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.