Randy McMurchy randy at
Mon Oct 6 08:51:15 PDT 2008

Jeremy Huntwork wrote:

> I know I'm jumping in a little bit late here, but I'm having trouble 
> spotting where this discussion took place and I'd appreciate a cluebat.

I'm not sure it was ever discussed. DJ went out on his own and
built a version of the book that we've since sort of adopted as
the direction of SVN.

I believe most of the information he has was determined by
seeing what was going on over at DIY. I know that they discussed
it a bit over there. You may want to check the DIY archives.

> I'm just curious, what was the rationale behind building gmp and mpfr in 
>   different manners within the same book? To be more specific, why let 
> GCC build them internally for its own use on GCC pass1 and then build 
> them separately for the other two passes of GCC?

I'm not sure the rationale. But you bring up a good point.
Perhaps it has something to do with GCC pass 1 having GMP
and MPFR built in the GCC tree makes those libraries statically
linked to GCC.

Then, in Pass 2 of GCC perhaps it was/is undesirable to have
the GMP and MPFR libs statically linked. I'm just guessing, though.
We'll have to get DJ's input on that one.

However, in Chapter 6 I know I wouldn't like to see statically
linked GMP and MPFR in GCC as I build them later on and it seems
silly to have a package statically linked in GCC and all other
packages link dynamically.

This is all a guess. DJ and Greg could probably provide much
better details. But I'm glad you brought it up Jeremy as we
need to have an idea why things are the way they are.


More information about the lfs-dev mailing list