glibc-2.17

re_nelson · 12-26-2012, 11:43 AM

Since LFS is "your system, your rules", have any brave souls yet ventured into the newly-released glibc-2.17? I keep my LFS on the bleeding edge, deviating from the book on occasion to build with newer software.

I'll probably roll out 2.17 between watching the bowl games this weekend but was curious if anyone else had already given it a go.

Keith Hedger · 12-26-2012, 12:48 PM

Been using 2.13 what's the difference between the two?

re_nelson · 12-26-2012, 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Keith Hedger

Been using 2.13 what's the difference between the two?

The usual bugfixes but what interests me are the string function optimizations. Over the years, I've steadily upgraded from the old a.out based libc through the change to glibc, so I have little fear about anything going amiss but was just curious to know if anyone else has made the move yet. Here's the NEWS posting:

http://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.g...f=NEWS;hb=HEAD

re_nelson · 12-29-2012, 09:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by re_nelson

Since LFS is "your system, your rules", have any brave souls yet ventured into the newly-released glibc-2.17? I keep my LFS on the bleeding edge, deviating from the book on occasion to build with newer software.

I'll probably roll out 2.17 between watching the bowl games this weekend but was curious if anyone else had already given it a go.

LFS SVN posted the directions for glibc-2.17 and a number of other new packages just a few hours after I had built the newest library. In the best sense of the term, the upgrade to 2.17 from 2.16.0 was uneventful. And, unlike 2.16.0, glibc-2.17 produces fewer errors during the check phase, just these two expected ones on my box:

Code:

[/usr/src/sources-lfs/glibc-build/posix/annexc.out] Error 1 (ignored)
[/usr/src/sources-lfs/glibc-build/conform/run-conformtest.out] Error 1 (ignored)