Randy McMurchy wrote:
Hey dude! How about moving that clock up about 6 hours?
Sorry bout that. Chicago was a link to /etc/localtime (which was a link
to itself (ID ten T error)). Thanks for bringing it to my attention.
-- DJ Lucas
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
F
Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
DJ Lucas wrote:
I used jhbuild for my first time last night so as to get at it quick. I
jhbuild? jhalfs maybe? :) Either way, glad you liked it. We're always
looking for suggestions, so feel free to send any to alfs-discuss.
--
JH
OMG sorry about that! I read
DJ Lucas wrote:
I used jhbuild for my first time last night so as to get at it quick. I
jhbuild? jhalfs maybe? :) Either way, glad you liked it. We're always
looking for suggestions, so feel free to send any to alfs-discuss.
--
JH
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
F
DJ Lucas wrote these words on 11/21/05 13:10 CST:
> [snip all]
Hey dude! How about moving that clock up about 6 hours?
:-)
--
Randy
rmlscsi: [GNU ld version 2.15.94.0.2 20041220] [gcc (GCC) 3.4.3]
[GNU C Library stable release version 2.3.4] [Linux 2.6.10 i686]
19:12:00 up 58 days, 4:36, 3 use
Archaic wrote:
On Sun, Nov 20, 2005 at 08:58:03PM +, DJ Lucas wrote:
I think that the deciding factor should be that this is acknowledged
and fixed upstream. OTOH, it looks like BLFS can work arround it if
needs be with an LD_PRELOAD line...It might be a pain to find them,
but it can be do
Archaic wrote:
We just did a prerelease. It uses 2.3.4.
Maybe I should have specified. Usually when I refer to something LFS
uses, I mean whatever is in SVN currently
--
Gerard Beekmans
/* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/ma
On Mon, Nov 21, 2005 at 05:34:47PM -0700, Gerard Beekmans wrote:
>
> If I understand correctly, Glibc-2.3.6 already has the fixes applied.
> LFS uses Glibc-2.3.6 so this probably is a moot point as far as LFS
> development goes, correct?
We just did a prerelease. It uses 2.3.4.
--
Archaic
Wa
Just a follow-up as the thread continued on blfs-support.
If I understand correctly, Glibc-2.3.6 already has the fixes applied.
LFS uses Glibc-2.3.6 so this probably is a moot point as far as LFS
development goes, correct?
I haven't tested this with Glibc-2.3.6 yet but I believe others have
Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
Matt Darcy wrote:
uncompressing a file with bzip2 compression using tar 1.15.1 built in
/tools failed for me.
From what you guys have both said, I'm assuming you expected it to
add the j option on its own ?
For tar >= 1.15.x all you should need to do on compressed
M.Canales.es wrote:
El Lunes, 21 de Noviembre de 2005 22:22, Matthew Burgess escribió:
3) Change the Makefile to do the following test instead:
if [ "$(prefix)" = / -o "$(prefix)" = "" ];
Try this:
if [ x$(prefix) = x/ ]
That is recommended way to test varaibles when you aren't sure that
Jeremy Byron wrote:
Matthew Burgess wrote:
3) Change the Makefile to do the following test instead:
if [ "$(prefix)" = / -o "$(prefix)" = "" ];
This should still give the 'unary operator expected' message, I would
think.
Nope, for once I did actually test this before proposing it :-)
In
Matthew Burgess wrote:
Hi folks,
There's a minor issue with the Makefile in this version.
Essentially, if one uses the current '--prefix=""' then the following
ends up in the logs:
/bin/sh: line 0: [: =: unary operator expected
That's caused by:
Makefile:71: if [ $(prefix) = / ]
In this c
El Lunes, 21 de Noviembre de 2005 22:22, Matthew Burgess escribió:
> 3) Change the Makefile to do the following test instead:
>
> if [ "$(prefix)" = / -o "$(prefix)" = "" ];
Try this:
if [ x$(prefix) = x/ ]
That is recommended way to test varaibles when you aren't sure that it allways
have an
On Mon, Nov 21, 2005 at 09:22:27PM +, Matthew Burgess wrote:
>
> I've a preference for option 3) in the long-term but put 2) in the book
> for the time being until the patch for 2 is submitted, accepted and in
> an upstream release.
Since option 3, or some other fix decided upon by upstream
Hi folks,
There's a minor issue with the Makefile in this version.
Essentially, if one uses the current '--prefix=""' then the following
ends up in the logs:
/bin/sh: line 0: [: =: unary operator expected
That's caused by:
Makefile:71: if [ $(prefix) = / ]
In this case, $(prefix) will obvi
Gottfried Haider wrote:
[c6/Udev-071]
installed udev-075
rewrote udev init.d-script, based on SUSE10: http://sukzessiv.net/udev
made /lib/udev for scripts,etc and /lib/udev/devices for static device
nodes (currently: fd, stdin, stdout, stderr, core)
removed last lines of 25-lfs.rules (running p
Hello,
I recently built a development LFS (SVN-20051112) and want to share my
experiences/nitpicks with you:
[lfslivecd-x86-6.1-3]
I got two errors when configuring my network ("/sbin/ifcfg: line 25: [:
too many arguments", "/usr/bin/net-setup: line 128: 2:: command not
found"), but worked a
Hello,
recently there was a change that moves Vim documentation to
/usr/share/doc. However, that doesn't work for me on the UTF-8 LiveCD.
Testcase:
vim
:help version6
Vim still tries to open /usr/share/vim64/doc/tags and doesn't find that
file. Please either revert the change or add a symli
18 matches
Mail list logo
