Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 8 Jan 2002 05:50:02 -0800 (PST)
From:      "f.johan.beisser" <jan@caustic.org>
To:        freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: misc/33595: libc breaking in -STABLE 
Message-ID:  <200201081350.g08Do2n62796@freefall.freebsd.org>

next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The following reply was made to PR misc/33595; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: "f.johan.beisser" <jan@caustic.org>
To: Sheldon Hearn <sheldonh@starjuice.net>
Cc: freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: misc/33595: libc breaking in -STABLE 
Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2002 05:40:28 -0800 (PST)

 On Tue, 8 Jan 2002, Sheldon Hearn wrote:
 
 > > it seems that it would be a bit odd to not be able to rebuild a small
 > > section (such as libc) alone, should it need replacement or an upgrade.
 >
 > You're confusing two different issues.
 >
 > You can build libc standalone, possibly with local modifications, so
 > long as you're building it on a synchronized system.
 >
 > You can upgrade your system using a ''make world'', thus acquiring such
 > a "synchronized system".
 
 i know this, but recently having patched gcc with the "stack-protector"
 made me wish to test a build on *part* of the base system, without
 rebuilding all of the userland or kernel. libc was one of the recommended
 pieces to rebuild.
 
 simply, i was "just following instructions".
 
 > The fact that you thought you'd be able to build a standalone version of
 > libc that is not synchronized with the system suggests that you haven't
 > understood the FreeBSD operating system, which provides a tightly
 > coupled userland and kernel.  This is very different from Linux, where
 > there's a tendency to mix and match bits and pieces.
 
 since you don't know me, i won't take offence to the linux reference (i've
 not really touched/admin'd any linux machines since about 97, and there've
 been worlds of changes since then from what i've heard and read) or to the
 lack of knowledge about FreeBSD.
 
 granted, doing a buildworld to rebuild the entire base system is a bit
 better of a habit (it's what i ususally do), rebuilding everything to test
 a "modified" compiler is a bit excessive. anyhow, consider the bug
 withdrawn, and set the bit to closed/disproved.
 
 thanks for the extra info,
 -- johan
 
 -------/ f. johan beisser /--------------------------------------+
   http://caustic.org/~jan                      jan@caustic.org
     "John Ashcroft is really just the reanimated corpse
          of J. Edgar Hoover." -- Tim Triche
 
 

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-bugs" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200201081350.g08Do2n62796>