Opened 5 weeks ago
Last modified 4 weeks ago
#5651 assigned enhancement
The sanity check in chapter 5 Glibc isn't very meaningful
| Reported by: | Xi Ruoyao | Owned by: | Xi Ruoyao |
|---|---|---|---|
| Priority: | normal | Milestone: | 12.4 |
| Component: | Book | Version: | git |
| Severity: | normal | Keywords: | |
| Cc: |
Description (last modified by )
We no longer "modify dynamic linker path" so simply checking the dynamic linker path is just meaningless. To me we should do a more through sanity check like what we are doing at the end of chapter 8 gcc instead.
I plan to update the sanity check it after 12.3 release, just create a ticket to remind myself.
Change History (8)
comment:1 by , 5 weeks ago
| Description: | modified (diff) |
|---|
comment:2 by , 4 weeks ago
comment:4 by , 4 weeks ago
I don't mean it should be removed. I mean it should be enhanced.
For example, the current check even cannot detect the problem when the user completely skipped chapter 5 binutils.
comment:5 by , 4 weeks ago
| Resolution: | worksforme |
|---|---|
| Status: | closed → reopened |
Just leave this for me after 12.3 release.
comment:6 by , 4 weeks ago
| Owner: | changed from to |
|---|---|
| Status: | reopened → new |
comment:7 by , 4 weeks ago
| Status: | new → assigned |
|---|
comment:8 by , 4 weeks ago
| Description: | modified (diff) |
|---|
Note:
See TracTickets
for help on using tickets.
To me the check is still valid. It has become a confidence check for new users. At this point the user has built the toolchain: binutils, gcc, and glibc. Running this quick check shows users that they are on the right track.