[Clfs-support] CLFS support

[Kevyn-Alexandre Paré]

Andrew,

>
> After thinking about this some, there's a good reason why musl doesn't
> use a relative path for the symlink, since it's possible to have the
> syslibdir be different than the libdir (names taken from musl Makefile).
>

k thx

> In this case, the path needs to be a full one.  Likely this means the
> book is doing the wrong thing when installing musl or reinstalling musl
> after building gcc is the more right thing to do.  Reinstalling,
> assuming you don't delete the musl dir after using it, will fix the
> issue, you shouldn't need to rebuild then.  But I've not tested this.

I have just tested by adding the make install after the "Section 4.9
GCC-4.7.3 - Final" and the symlink stay there until the end of the
procedure.
Here what I add to my script the isSuccess check the $? return code
and print success or error accordingly.

# 4.9. GCC-4.7.3 - Final
<snip>

# Fix for musl libc symlink
cd musl-0.9.14
isSuccess "cd musl-libc-0.9.14"
DESTDIR=${CLFS}/cross-tools/${CLFS_TARGET} make install >
${CLFS}/sources/MUSL-LOG
isSuccess "DESTDIR=${CLFS}/cross-tools/${CLFS_TARGET} make install"
cd ..
isSuccess "cd .."

test -L "/mnt/clfs/cross-tools/arm-linux-musleabihf/lib/ld-musl-armhf.so.1"
isSuccess "test
/mnt/clfs/cross-tools/arm-linux-musleabihf/lib/ld-musl-armhf.so.1"

Will try to boot my system later.

-KA