mirror of
https://git.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs.git
synced 2025-03-06 14:24:48 +00:00
toolchaintechnotes: reword the reason "cc-lfs not usable on pc"
The problem is not "gcc building system doesn't know cc-lfs can run on pc", but "cc-lfs really cannot run on pc". Let's stop anyone from thinking about "why not just tell the gcc building system the fact".
This commit is contained in:
parent
f6820bb618
commit
6b052ef554
@ -257,11 +257,28 @@
|
||||
paragraph is that cc1 is unable to build a fully functional libstdc++, but
|
||||
this is the only compiler available for building the C/C++ libraries
|
||||
during stage 2. Of course, the compiler built by stage 2, cc-lfs,
|
||||
would be able to build those libraries, but (1) the build system of
|
||||
gcc does not know cc-lfs can run on pc, and (2) using cc-lfs on pc
|
||||
would create a risk of linking to the pc libraries, since cc-lfs is a native
|
||||
compiler. So we have to re-build libstdc++ later as a part of
|
||||
gcc stage 2.</para>
|
||||
would be able to build those libraries, but:</para>
|
||||
|
||||
<itemizedlist>
|
||||
<listitem>
|
||||
<para>
|
||||
Generally cc-lfs cannot run on pc (the host distro). Despite the
|
||||
triplets of pc and lfs are compatible to each other, an executable
|
||||
for lfs will depend on glibc-&glibc-version; while the host distro
|
||||
may utilizes a different libc implementation (for example, musl) or
|
||||
a previous release of glibc (for example, glibc-2.13).
|
||||
</para>
|
||||
</listitem>
|
||||
<listitem>
|
||||
<para>
|
||||
Even if cc-lfs happens to run on pc, using it on pc would create
|
||||
a risk of linking to the pc libraries, since cc-lfs is a native
|
||||
compiler.
|
||||
</para>
|
||||
</listitem>
|
||||
</itemizedlist>
|
||||
|
||||
<para>So we have to re-build libstdc++ later as a part of gcc stage 2.</para>
|
||||
|
||||
<para>In &ch-final; (or <quote>stage 3</quote>), all the packages needed for
|
||||
the LFS system are built. Even if a package has already been installed into
|
||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user