[lfs-dev] binutils, elfutils-0.175, objdump, linux kernel-4.19.12 (SVN-20190101) Follow-up

Ken Moffat zarniwhoop at ntlworld.com
Tue Jan 8 18:52:36 PST 2019


On Tue, Jan 08, 2019 at 09:18:36PM -0500, Jean-Marc Pigeon via lfs-dev wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> Redone all chapter 6 with elfutils-0.173
> (all things equal otherwise)
> Kernel compilation is now OK.
> 
> According:
> https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/61151
> 
> Bug is in binutils, patch have been applied on git
> but there is no binutils-2.31.2 (as fare I can see).
> 
> My proposal is to have SVN to back track to elfutils-0.173
> waiting for binutils next official release.
> 
> comments?
> 

On the system where I most recently built LFS (but back in late
November) I have elfutils-0.175 and binutils-2.31.1

I successfully built, and booted, both the 4.19.3 amd 4.20.0 kernels
on that machine (as well as a 4.20-rc), using - as normal - the
original kernel headers which were 4.19.3.  Too busy to try 5.0-rc1.

Looking at my scripts, for elfutils I currently ensure that my
CFLAGS include '-g' (yeughh - my main purpose with CFLAGS is to
strip debug info to save space since I'm rubbish as using gdb ;)
and I assume that the book builds without specifying CFLAGS.  Maybe
that is related, maybe it is a lingering result of some previous
problem.

On all my previous systems, including 8.3, I have not seen any
reason to update elfutils or binutils, so only that one system uses
0.175.

I don't have any objection to reverting to an older version of a
package (currently using an older psutils), but at the moment I
don't think one "doesn't build for me" (when it presumably did build
for whoever updated those packages) is a persuasive reason.

ĸen
-- 
Take three of these a minute for four minutes.  Don't take with
alcohol or you'll grow an extra head.
                                      -- The Doctor


More information about the lfs-dev mailing list