Will not run on my machines!!!
1 Like
Ok, I’ll try it today. Also the -a with --depclean. I’ve used -c instead of depclean for a while. Will try the long versions!
Edit: after emerge -a --depclean portage found 81 packages for removal!
2 Likes
The update&upgrade is finally ready. I needed to use a binary for GCC because the build stopped with errors after appr. 40 minutes. Now I can unmount this SSD 
2 Likes
Has the performance of portage improved in recent times? I remember it being sloooooooooow.
1 Like
Portage is just a Python script. I think delays are more likely to be
- the Gentoo repo sites being busy
- compiling is slow, especially in an older computer
1 Like
GCC can be a problem for older computers!!! One of my old Dell computers, has only 4GB of ram, maxed out, and it ran for over 20hrs, and never made it through GCC!!! Runs XP just fine!!!
I have a PC now that is running the gcc tests, probably will take another hr to complete!!! But that is the fun, of Gentoo and LFS, compiling will definitely find the weaknes in any PC!!!
2 Likes
I dont see how a compiler can be such a monster.
What a compiler does is not all that complicated.
How long does it take to compile Clang?
I bet gcc is a bad case of code bloat.
1 Like
If you mean by slow the time it calculates the upgraded packages it is about 1-2 minutes before it lists all rebuilds/binaries for upgrade.
The compilation times are more hardware dependent. I switched thunderbird to thunderbird-bin because it took more than an hour to compile any new version on my laptop.
1 Like
@nevj
It is not always the compile time.of gcc or clang or rust or llvm but the tests that come after
the compiling, is the killer. one can issue a “time make” and find the compile time. I find that
of very little use, since I already have a good guess.
You need to compile LFS and just see how far you can get!!!
1 Like
Some day maybe. I have gone back to R programming at the moment.
I dont understand why gcc needs tests after compilation?
Yes, most source code includes tests. I suppose it is to verify that it is working right in your architecture and environment.
So what does a gcc test do? Do they use your compiled gcc to compile something else, then see if it runs? That should not take ages. Maybe they test ever option?.. gcc has a few… that would take time maybe?
I have to admit I simply do not know why.
2 Likes
I think it builds itself as a test
2 Likes
@nevj @ihasama
My best answer: LFS builds the tests when compiling Chapter 5,6 and 7 doing cross-compiling!!
In Chapter 8, one builds the final build of 82 packages, with tests!!!
Some tests are more critical than others but all are deemed necessary!!! The tests not only checks the integrity of the package, tests will also set symlinks!!!
Now, I believe some tests could be excluded, but the ones marked as critical, I think not!!!
The word “Linux” can be very vague, but to actually build and know “Linux” one should try LFS, and build LFS to the CLI, not to even mention “BLFS”
And BLFS have tests also!!!
3 Likes
I am starting to think LFS may be one person’s way to build linux.
and, what you mean by build linux to the CLI is build a kernel plus a few utilities from source code.
I dont imagine all distros do it the LFS way… and BSD certainly does not do it the LFS way.
So I am going to ask… what is the simplest way to build linux from source?
It has to be something like
- compile gcc or some other C compiler
- compile a kernel
- make an initramfs
- compile some utilities for user space
- put all the binaries together into a filesystem, and boot it
I say that without opening the LFS book, or anything else, and I acknowledge that compiling a C compiler is a multi-step mess, and compiling a kernel involves setting a heap of parameters.
What you are saying about LFS seems to add a whole lot of convoluted ‘test’ procedures to what should be about 5 simple steps.
I am not criticizing LFS. I dont even understand it.
I am just saying that if I were wanting to do this I would be tempted to throw the book away and do it out of my head.
I would probably get into unfathomable trouble , but if I succeeded the end product would be a simpler non-lfs linux.
2 Likes
@nevj
You are a very intelligent man Mr Neville, but you would not get far without the LFS book for a guide, just like the Gentoo guide. Gentoo and LFS, are a lot alike, but the big difference, Gentoo has a package manager, LFS does not!!!
Now, I am not trying to blow smoke up anyone’s ass, and say Linux can not be built in other ways, but the very concept of LFS, was or is for learning Linux, LFS was never intended to be a daily driver!!!
I now have LFS and Gentoo booting on the PC I am using, and in order to get both LFS and Gentoo booting I had to switch to UUID’s instead of using /dev/xxxx, a mistake I made.
Sure, I could have slapped Windows or some other Linux or BSD, on this machine, and proclaimed Linux, the Godsend, for a PC, but if one wants to learn, as too what it takes, for Linux to run, it is a very good eye opener!!!
I agree wholeheartedly. Everyone has to learn from either a book or a teacher… especially all the little obscure bits that we get hung up on.
The basic steps one can work out, but all the little tricky bits will challenge anyone.
I was lucky with Gentoo to have your guidance at my second try.
I do want to setup Gentoo again in my main machine, and I think I will use it as the builder for LFS on the same machine. I have plenty of space to do that. If I can get that far, I might try throwing the book away… like trying a build with Clang instead of gcc, or even trying to build BSD.
What did you think of my 5 steps… are they right?
Yes, exactly. It is like a practice court.
I assume people who may want to bulid a distro have a learning curve with LFS thsn go on to do it their own way.
So you have mastered LFS.
Where do you go from here?
2 Likes
I would not word it that way but after a lot of work and late night compiling, I finally have a two drive setup with Gentoo and LFS, with Gentoo serving as the host. I really used the Gentoo Live USB to do the LFS compile.
All I will say is study the LFS book, do not see where there is much of a work-around, for what the LFS book has!!! But you know more about the compiling part than I will ever know!!!
BLFS and tracking all the dependencies a package needs, and try to get a working browser and de!!!
2 Likes
Each package should come with a config file that will look for all necessary dependencies and tell you what is missing.
1 Like
You make it sound easy!!!
2 Likes
I have a lot of practice installing R from source code. It finds heaps of dependencies in a new distro where I have never used it before.
You just keep running the configure script , adding the missing dependency, running it again,… With R it takes about 30 rounds… an all day job.
With LFS you dont have a package system to use to add each dependency… so you would have to loop thru it all for each dependency too.
Good luck!!
2 Likes
I don’t know how the BLFS should be done haven’t even tried LFS but shouldn’t it be possible to install a package manager? Or would it be easier to use flatpack/appimages for Firefox etc? And for DE I wouldn’t go for full DE, just i3 or any other window manager.
2 Likes