Re: New libc version support

[Thomas Jourdan <tjourdan at neuf dot fr>]

Le dimanche 21 dÃcembre 2008 Ã 19:11 +0100, Yann E. MORIN a Ãcrit :
> The problem with glibc >= 2.8 is there are no tarballs. This means
> that if you build a toolchain now, accidentally remove the tarballs,
> and later come back and rebuild the toolchain with the same .config,
> you are *not* guaranteed to be using the same glibc sources, as the
> -latest tarball may have changed without you noticing... This is sad.

Sure this is sad not to be sure to be able to re-build the toolchain.
That's why I let this functionnality in the experimental features.

Le dimanche 21 dÃcembre 2008 Ã 19:25 +0100, Dimitry Andric a Ãcrit :
> Also note there's a "glibc-2_8" and "glibc-2_8-branch" tag.  The former
> is  the release version, while the latter is a sort of "maintenance"
> branch.  You generally want the latter, but this is a moving target.
> For example, at the moment there are a few small fixes against the
> release.
> 
> The same goes for "glibc-2_9" and "glibc-2_9-branch".

Maybe we could use the CT_LIBC_GLIBC_2_8_or_later variable to fecth with
cvs the glibc sources, the same way it is done with eglibc. If this
sounds like a correct solution, I can submit a new patch tomorrow.

By the way, I successfully built i686, x86_64 and powerpc toolchains
based on kernel 2.6.26, gcc 4.3.2, eglibc 2.9. It was as simple as click
and build. Nevertheless I need to do some more testing on the tool
chains before sending config files.

Regards,
Thomas




--
For unsubscribe information see http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faq