LFS and 64-bit hosts
dbn.lists at gmail.com
Mon Oct 1 11:20:02 PDT 2007
On 9/30/07, Chris Staub <chris at beaker67.com> wrote:
> There are an increasing number of users who report errors building LFS,
> and then say they are attempting it on a 64-bit host system. It really
> needs to be stated on the LFS website that LFS assumes a 32-bit system,
> and point users with 64-bit systems either to the 64-bit LFS
> book/livecd, or CLFS.
Very good point. Seems we're getting support requests on this every
other day now. I've never been very fond of the ambiguousness in LFS
about what hardware is supported. The only thing that's fully
supported right now is x86. Full stop. If people in the know want to
make it work on PPC or x86_64, that's great, but we shouldn't give
that impression to people who are just following along.
First, where should this be placed for LFS? I'd say in the book (can't
decide where) it should be really clear what is and is not supported.
Unfortunately, LFS-6.3 is in the wild already. We can change trunk to
say x86 only until the jh branch is merged. For everything else, we
should point to CLFS. If this info is already in the book, it needs to
be made a lot clearer.
Second, the LFS website should say this. Probably right up front:
Third, I think the LiveCD currently says "linux64 - A 64-bit kernel
for use with CLFS" in the options. While that seems plenty clear to
me, I think it needs to be even clearer that building LFS does not
work from a 64 bit kernel.
IMO, of course.
More information about the lfs-dev