[Clfs-support] a strategy question

William Harrington berzerkula at cox.net
Mon Nov 19 15:06:43 PST 2012

On Nov 17, 2012, at 4:38 AM, Jorge Almeida wrote:

> Both have toolchains that are newer than the
> recommended versions...

I'd recommend CLFS dev and not 1.2.0 as dev has been pretty stable for  
half a year or more and is about to be released. We are in a package  
freeze. Builds have been successful, and ironing out some arch  
specific issues like boot loaders mostly. If you insist to use 1.2.0,  
newer hosts will build that  as well. When you do encounter an issue,  
search mailing lists through the internet for any issues that you will  
encounter. I have an updated lfs livecd you can use , and I use it to  
build CLFS dev builds just fine. It ill build 1.0.0 and 1.2.0 just fine.



William Harrington
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.clfs.org/pipermail/clfs-support-clfs.org/attachments/20121119/71459cd6/attachment-0001.htm>

More information about the Clfs-support mailing list