[Clfs-dev] Matching up CLFS snapshot versions with LFS/BLFS releases

[William Harrington]

On Thu, July 20, 2017 00:08, Kevin Buckley wrote:

Well for one LFS != CLFS. We have a different release schedule. Also, can
count the active devs on half a hand.

>
>
> so nothing that suggests any direct correspondence with LFS/BLFS
> release numbers, so, my questions are:
>
> 1) Are the any known CLFS "commits"  that can be associated with the
>      "mainline"  LFS/BLFS releases
>     Or do I just have to wade through them and find one that matches.
>

We are closer to LFS development as the book versions are concerned.
Stable releases will not at all match LFS. They release multiple times a
year. We release when the stars, planets and moons are all aligned.

> 2) If I already have a 64-bit LFS/BLFS 8.0 system, can I just retro-fit
>      the 32-bit libs (so as to give what I think is then a MultiLib
> system)
>      using the 64-bit (Chapter 6) toolchain ?
>     Or do I have to go and build a MultiLib compiler in the "Chapter 5"
>      stage

You are probably using /lib /usr/lib for 32-bit, so you can continue with
/lib /usr/lib and use /lib32 /usr/lib32 for your 32 bit components or move
every library that is 64-bit to /lib64 /usr/lib64 and then update all of
the pkg-config files and rebuild binutils with multilib and 64bit bfd
support, gcc with multilib support, and then glibc. You can do all this in
your running system. But this order: binutils with multilib capability and
64bit bfd, GCC with multilib support, then GLIBC, and then GCC.

You will have to decide what layout you want. Can refer to this for help:
https://www.williamfeely.info/wiki/Lfs-multilib/blfs  uses lib32 for
32bit. if ya going to use lib for 32-bit and lib64 for 64-bit then refer
to CLFS.

I'd most likely go the lib32 route for your 32-bit components.

Sincerely,

William Harrington