On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 06:33:48PM +0100, Filip Hroch wrote:
>
> Thank you for information. My story continues...
>
> I was start by my firts step after the reading of the ansfer.
> I reinstalled of the FreeBSD. Now, I have only one large slice
> and a swap on my BSD partition. The file system is
On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 08:21:09AM -0700, Joel Baker wrote:
>
> Which works great, if it's libc-dev that's needed. It fails fairly
> severely, if a specific version of a library is needed due to, say, a fix
> in an included library that also requires a fix in the application.
>
> Not to mention p
On Sat, Dec 06, 2003 at 05:00:41PM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote:
>
> The ld.so.1 symlink was just an example. *All* symlinks in /lib are broken.
> Try "tar jtvf gnu-knetbsd.tar.bz2 ./lib" and see it by yourself.
I recall having to set the libc symlinks manualy, so at least these are
correct. The sy
On Sat, 6 Dec 2003, Robert Millan wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 11:25:25PM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote:
> >
> > # tar jtvf gnu-knetbsd.tar.bz2 ./lib/ld.so.1
> > lrwxrwxrwx root/root 0 2003-12-04 22:23:44 ./lib/ld.so.1 -> l
> >
> > Warning: this tarball suffers from the "mysterious symlin
On Fri, Dec 05, 2003 at 11:25:25PM +0100, Santiago Vila wrote:
>
> # tar jtvf gnu-knetbsd.tar.bz2 ./lib/ld.so.1
> lrwxrwxrwx root/root 0 2003-12-04 22:23:44 ./lib/ld.so.1 -> l
>
> Warning: this tarball suffers from the "mysterious symlink bug" and
> it's probably unusable.
It should stil
5 matches
Mail list logo
