On Sunday 12 November 2006 17:56, Ken Moffat wrote: > > I assume you are building from LFS-svn ? The current blfs-svn is > still targetted at LFS-6.2, at least until BLFS-6.2 is tagged. > Yes, svn-20061028 > Without looking back at the cmails you refer to, I think you may be > doing Dan an injustice - taking a patch from fedora is almost > certainly a correct way to deal with blfs problems caused by using > the kernel's own sanitised headers, because it was the fedora kernel > headers maintainer who did the work to get sanitised headers into the > kernel, and fedora used them to rebuild all their packages. Sorry, I did not know this. Anyway, it was not at all my intention to issue a critic, only a suggestion > > Probably best to open a ticket for this in blfs trac, so that it > doesn't get forgotten when blfs-svn starts to move forward. > Who should do this ? I am not familiar, but the first time could be an experience
Thank you very much as well as Dan for the diff, I hope to try it in short time. Edgar -- --------------------- Dr.-Ing. Edgar Alwers Weinheim -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
