Congrats to all of the members of the LFS team. This is really a great
achievement for us.
" Gossip is like a photograph. It starts with a negative, then is developed
and enlarged"
---
Regards
Mukesh Kaushal
- Original Message -
From: "Justin R. Knierim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Devel
The LFS LiveCD Team is proud to announce the release of the x86-6.1.1-1
version of the LFS LiveCD. This version is built using LFS 6.1.1 and
BLFS packages from the svn branch. Packages for LFS 6.1.1 are included
on the LiveCD. Other new features:
* XFCE Terminal with helpful menus, includi
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> I'm working with qt on a fresh lfs-dev system. The latest suitable for
> KDE is version 3.3.5. I've built about all the dependencies and am
> trying to get qt validated.
>
> My access is via a chroot from an LFS 6.1 system.
>
> During the make, I am getting a segfault from
Dan Nicholson([EMAIL PROTECTED])@Thu, Dec 01, 2005 at 09:06:54PM -0800:
>
> If you want a throw away distro, download the LFS Live CD. I just checked
> it out for the first time, and it looks very nice.
>
Indeed.
LFS live cd worked fine for me,the last time i used to build LFS for a new
arriv
On 12/1/05, Stephen Liu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Then I searched Internet for an ideal host building LFS and found
> follows;
>
> Mankdrake
> Slackware
> Knoppix
> etc.
> and Ubuntu on this thread
[...]
> Is there any other recommendation? OR is there any opinon on this
> newly released Slac
Hi Richard and folks,
> IIRC, Fedora patches the hell out of GCC-4 so that it isn't a regular
> GCC-4 anymore. I don't feel up to searching out all the threads on
> this. I think the best advice is still 'Don't build LFS from FC-4'.
>
> R.
I'm prepared to have another round on building LFS -->
As you may be aware, there is a new implementation of ALFS available,
called jhalfs. The main purpose of jhalfs is to provide a pure reference
build of LFS by extracting the commands to run directly from the LFS
book. This has the added benefit of reducing maintenance as there are no
profiles n
Bernd Feldmeier wrote:
> a) dependency of kernel version and linux-libc-header version
None whatsoever. These are two different packages, with two different
reasons for existing.
l-l-h is based on the kernel headers, but you can use any version of
either of them (well, no, that isn't quite right
Nico R. wrote:
I suggest finding a mirror which still has version 2.01 of man-pages and
including the correct URIs in the LFS 6.1 and 6.1.1 errata.
LFS has its own package mirrors. On it are the packages for LFS version
6.0 to Development. There is no sense in adding download locations to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello!
Chapter 3.2 of LFS 6.1.1
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/6.1.1/chapter03/packages.html>
lists http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/docs/manpages/> as download
location for man-pages-2.01. This package is not/no longer available
from this l
Hi guys,
nice discussion about that very important stuff.
I began this discussion earlier ...
So maybe someone could clarify this stuff clearly ...
a) dependency of kernel version and linux-libc-header version
b) problems occuring
c) real meaning of sanatized headers (why ...)
d) creating our o
On 12/1/05, Matthew Burgess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dan Nicholson wrote:
>
> > As a follow up to this comment, beagle also uses inotify. I built it
> > with l-l-h-2.6.12.0, and it works fine now that I've upgraded my
> > kernel to 2.6.14. How? beagle (appropriately) includes inotify.h in
>
On 11/30/05, Mark Rosenstand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> And I run a dovecot IMAP server without inotify-support on a
> inotify-enabled Linux 2.6.14 machine because it couldn't find
>
Once last thing: apparently the not finding is an
issue for dovecot. Read here:
http://www.dovecot.org/list/d
Dan Nicholson wrote:
As a follow up to this comment, beagle also uses inotify. I built it
with l-l-h-2.6.12.0, and it works fine now that I've upgraded my
kernel to 2.6.14. How? beagle (appropriately) includes inotify.h in
it's source tree.
Just as a point of interest, what happens if one c
On 12/1/05, Dan Nicholson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 12/1/05, Mark Rosenstand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I would like it to use inotify, but it doesn't because the headers are
> > too old. I never really understood why most (all?) distributors choose
> > to use kernel headers that doesn't
On 12/1/05, Mark Rosenstand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I would like it to use inotify, but it doesn't because the headers are
> too old. I never really understood why most (all?) distributors choose
> to use kernel headers that doesn't match the running kernel.
It's up to the userspace package y
On Thu, 01 Dec 2005 10:04:50 -0500
Jeremy Huntwork <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Andrew Benton wrote:
>
> > Bing. You hit the nail on the head there. As Richard said, Fedora Core 4
> > isn't a suitable distro to build the stable version of the book. It
> > should work OK for the development vers
Andrew Benton wrote:
Bing. You hit the nail on the head there. As Richard said, Fedora Core 4
isn't a suitable distro to build the stable version of the book. It
should work OK for the development version but that may not be suitable
if it's your first attempt at LFS. I've had good results bui
Mark Rosenstand wrote:
Matt Darcy wrote:
Mark Rosenstand wrote:
And I run a dovecot IMAP server without inotify-support on a
inotify-enabled Linux 2.6.14 machine because it couldn't find
And what is your experience with this ?
Do you find that inotify works/is picked up by dovecot ? or do
Matt Darcy wrote:
> Mark Rosenstand wrote:
> > And I run a dovecot IMAP server without inotify-support on a
> > inotify-enabled Linux 2.6.14 machine because it couldn't find
> >
>
> And what is your experience with this ?
>
> Do you find that inotify works/is picked up by dovecot ? or do you
> f
Mark Rosenstand wrote:
On Wed, 2005-11-30 at 07:46 -0800, Dan Nicholson wrote:
On 11/30/05, Feldmeier Bernd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello guys,
I created a LFS 6.1.1 test system.
But is there a problem if I use
the latest kernel version ?
Because Using Linux-Libc-Headers version
and late
21 matches
Mail list logo
