confusion between l (el) and 1 (one)

[John Paul]

In 6.9.1 (Installation of Glibc) the following instructions appear:

When running make install, a script called test- installation. pl performs a 
small sanity test on our newly installed Glibc. However, because our toolchain
 still points to the / tools directory, the sanity test would be carried out
 against the wrong Glibc. We can force the script to check the Glibc we have
 just installed with the following:



sed -i \
's|libs -o|libs -L/usr/lib -Wl,-dynamic-linker=/lib/ld-linux.so.2 -o|' \
scripts/test-installation.pl

When I first ran that command I misinterpreted -Wl as -W1 (using 1(one) instead of l (el)). With this typographical error, Glibc will configure, compile, and pass the "make -k check" tests. It will fail during "make install" with an unrecognized command output from CC. I suggest a note specifying -Wl as l (el).

[Chris Staub]

I disagree. Anyone using LFS should know to be careful about checking these commands closely.

[John Paul]

Replying to chris@linuxfromscratch.org:

I disagree. Anyone using LFS should know to be careful about checking these commands closely.

After making my first mistake (above) I was careful, and sorta knew what to look for. I had never used the -Wl switch before that. I would agree with you IF the font used in the book was one that gave distinction between one and el, and between zero and oh. Perhaps a simpler solution would be to use a different font.

[bdubbs@…]

The users selects the font to use for their browser.

The book is about learning. I believe the original poster learned something about the gcc -Wl option and about the need to read the book closely and not just blindly apply what he thinks is in the book.