Re: Kernel Headers Script [was: Rally the Troops LFS/BLFS/CLFS/Livecd too]

steve crosby wrote: On 5/4/06, Jim Gifford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Steve, I just added a headers_list script that will look at the sources and pull all the headers and put them into a report. Let's run that and compare what I have in the script now to see what's missing. http://ftp.jg555

Re: Udev error in serio with IBM TrackPoint

Chris Schwemmer wrote: Hi, I'm running a build of LFS-SVN (latest version). So far everything works fine, but during bootup I get an error message from udevd and the "Send this bugreport..." message. When the udev bootscript is running, I get this message on my terminal: udevd-event[992]: wait_

Re: Udev error in serio with IBM TrackPoint

I wrote: Chris Schwemmer wrote: Hi, I'm running a build of LFS-SVN (latest version). So far everything works fine, but during bootup I get an error message from udevd and the "Send this bugreport..." message. When the udev bootscript is running, I get this message on my terminal: udevd-event[9

Re: Udev error in serio with IBM TrackPoint

Chris Schwemmer wrote: Hi, I'm running a build of LFS-SVN (latest version). So far everything works fine, but during bootup I get an error message from udevd and the "Send this bugreport..." message. When the udev bootscript is running, I get this message on my terminal: udevd-event[992]: wait_

Re: Kernel Headers Script [was: Rally the Troops LFS/BLFS/CLFS/Livecd too]

On 5/4/06, Jim Gifford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Steve, I just added a headers_list script that will look at the sources and pull all the headers and put them into a report. Let's run that and compare what I have in the script now to see what's missing. http://ftp.jg555.com/headers/headers_

Re: What's Going on

Archaic wrote: > On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 06:36:53PM -0700, Jim Gifford wrote: >>> >> I can understand that, but we should just provide a link to the sources >> md5 instead of creating our own. It helps prevent any contamination of >> the file by us. > > Not every package has an md5 file. None

Re: Kernel Headers Script [was: Rally the Troops LFS/BLFS/CLFS/Livecd too]

Steve, I just added a headers_list script that will look at the sources and pull all the headers and put them into a report. Let's run that and compare what I have in the script now to see what's missing. http://ftp.jg555.com/headers/headers_list -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/list

Re: Kernel Headers Script [was: Rally the Troops LFS/BLFS/CLFS/Livecd too]

steve crosby wrote: On 5/4/06, Jim Gifford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Ok, got those changes in. Thanx for the reports Steve, this is what I need. no worries - with those changes (dccp.h, netfilter.h) iptables (and ulog) compile fine. Diff attached for headers script for reference diff -Naur

Re: Kernel Headers Script [was: Rally the Troops LFS/BLFS/CLFS/Livecd too]

On 5/4/06, Jim Gifford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Ok, got those changes in. Thanx for the reports Steve, this is what I need. no worries - with those changes (dccp.h, netfilter.h) iptables (and ulog) compile fine. Diff attached for headers script for reference diff -Naur headers.sh.orig heade

Re: Kernel Headers Script [was: Rally the Troops LFS/BLFS/CLFS/Livecd too]

Ok, got those changes in. Thanx for the reports Steve, this is what I need. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: Kernel Headers Script [was: Rally the Troops LFS/BLFS/CLFS/Livecd too]

On 5/4/06, Jim Gifford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Steve, I think I got it covered in the 00.52, I'll be posting it shortly. still no joy linux/dccp.h missing - I added that, and then this occurs extensions/libipt_connmark.c: In function 'init': extensions/libipt_connmark.c:52: error: 'NFC_U

Re: What's Going on

Jeremy Huntwork wrote: Jim Gifford wrote: Perhaps you should visit more often. ;) There have been a few udev rules threads that I'd appreciate your comments on, too. I've never seen a ticket assigned to me to answer questions. After all that's why we have the ticket system in place. I th

Re: What's Going on

On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 06:36:53PM -0700, Jim Gifford wrote: > > > I can understand that, but we should just provide a link to the sources > md5 instead of creating our own. It helps prevent any contamination of > the file by us. Not every package has an md5 file. None of our patches do, eithe

Re: What's Going on

Randy McMurchy wrote: Jim Gifford wrote these words on 05/03/06 20:36 CST: I've never seen a ticket assigned to me to answer questions. After all that's why we have the ticket system in place. You mean you've been monitoring the lists and because nobody assigned you a ticket, you have

Re: What's Going on

Jim Gifford wrote these words on 05/03/06 20:36 CST: > I've never seen a ticket assigned to me to answer questions. After all > that's why we have the ticket system in place. You mean you've been monitoring the lists and because nobody assigned you a ticket, you haven't contributed to any thread

Re: What's Going on

Jim Gifford wrote: Perhaps you should visit more often. ;) There have been a few udev rules threads that I'd appreciate your comments on, too. I've never seen a ticket assigned to me to answer questions. After all that's why we have the ticket system in place. I think perhaps we have diffe

Re: What's Going on

Archaic wrote: jhalfs was discussed in dozens of threads a long time ago. What you are arguing against is a method to test the book directly from it's XML. That is extremely powerful. And if it is the MD5s you don't like, I cannot understand that, either. It is common (and recommended) practice t

Re: What's Going on

On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 04:43:30PM -0700, Jim Gifford wrote: > > I see to many conflicts of interest. I see a lot of ALFS stuff getting > merged into the LFS book, with no real discussion. jhalfs was discussed in dozens of threads a long time ago. What you are arguing against is a method to test

Re: What's Going on

Jim Gifford wrote: I see to many conflicts of interest. I see a lot of ALFS stuff getting merged into the LFS book, with no real discussion. What do you mean "a lot of ALFS stuff"? You've commented on one idea today, the md5sums, that is ALFS-oriented. What else are you referring to? -- JH -

Re: Kernel Headers Script [was: Rally the Troops LFS/BLFS/CLFS/Livecd too]

steve crosby wrote: On 5/4/06, Jim Gifford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: steve crosby wrote: > My intent was to identify that one of the options provided in the > thread (Jim's work with the linux headers) has problems, as it's > currently not working with certain applications outside of LFS.

What's Going on

I've been kinda of confused by the latest ideals going into the book. I see things going into a direction that I disagree with. I see to many conflicts of interest. I see a lot of ALFS stuff getting merged into the LFS book, with no real discussion. Which happens to be the one thing that I'm a

Re: Kernel Headers Script [was: Rally the Troops LFS/BLFS/CLFS/Livecd too]

steve crosby wrote: On 5/4/06, Jim Gifford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: steve crosby wrote: > My intent was to identify that one of the options provided in the > thread (Jim's work with the linux headers) has problems, as it's > currently not working with certain applications outside of LFS.

Kernel Headers Script [was: Rally the Troops LFS/BLFS/CLFS/Livecd too]

On 5/4/06, Jim Gifford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: steve crosby wrote: > My intent was to identify that one of the options provided in the > thread (Jim's work with the linux headers) has problems, as it's > currently not working with certain applications outside of LFS. > I think I was able

Re: Chapter 24. X Window System - visual changes

On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 03:29:22PM -0700, Dan Nicholson wrote: > > >"When installing X, symlinks were created from the OTF and TTF X font > >directories to /usr/share/fonts/X11-{OTF,TTF}. This prevents Fontconfig > >from using the poorly rendered Type1 fonts or the non-scalable bitmapped > >fonts.

Re: Rally the Troops LFS/BLFS/CLFS/Livecd too

steve crosby wrote: My intent was to identify that one of the options provided in the thread (Jim's work with the linux headers) has problems, as it's currently not working with certain applications outside of LFS. Perhaps I should have been more clear in the comment I made. I'll leave the discu

Re: Rally the Troops LFS/BLFS/CLFS/Livecd too

On 5/4/06, Matt Darcy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: steve crosby wrote: > On 5/1/06, Bryan Kadzban <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> a setup. The sticking point would be programs that include linux/.h >> or asm/.h, if there are any. And it sounds like there are glibc >> alternatives to all of t

Re: Openssl

On 5/3/06, Bruce Dubbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: If we use: sed -i "s:-lcrypto:/usr/lib/libcrypto.a -ldl:g" configure I'm still trying to sort this out, but here's what I know. -ldl is not needed in LIBS for the shared library because it is NEEDED by libcrypto.so, so ld pulls it in at buil

Re: Openssl

Justin R. Knierim wrote: > Bruce Dubbs wrote: >> This seems to have been reported last September! >> http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=openssh-unix-dev&m=112600064723904&w=2 > > I can confirm that adding "--with-ldflags=-ldl" to configure as > described in that thread works for me. I've already mad

Re: Openssl

Bruce Dubbs wrote: This seems to have been reported last September! http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=openssh-unix-dev&m=112600064723904&w=2 I can confirm that adding "--with-ldflags=-ldl" to configure as described in that thread works for me. As for the sed and if it actually does anything, n

Re: Openssl

Justin R. Knierim wrote: > Bruce Dubbs wrote: >> /usr/lib/libcrypto.a(dso_dlfcn.o): In function `dlfcn_load': >> dso_dlfcn.c:(.text+0x63): undefined reference to `dlopen' > I thought I had screwed something up during my build yesterday, but I > had the exact same problem. Running 'make test' for

Re: Openssl

Bruce Dubbs wrote: /usr/lib/libcrypto.a(dso_dlfcn.o): In function `dlfcn_load': dso_dlfcn.c:(.text+0x63): undefined reference to `dlopen' dso_dlfcn.c:(.text+0xc5): undefined reference to `dlclose' dso_dlfcn.c:(.text+0xf4): undefined reference to `dlerror' /usr/lib/libcrypto.a(dso_dlfcn.o): In fun

Udev error in serio with IBM TrackPoint

Hi, I'm running a build of LFS-SVN (latest version). So far everything works fine, but during bootup I get an error message from udevd and the "Send this bugreport..." message. When the udev bootscript is running, I get this message on my terminal: udevd-event[992]: wait_for_sysfs: waiting for '/

Re: Rally the Troops LFS/BLFS/CLFS/Livecd too

Matt Darcy wrote: I think we are going to disagree here I'm pretty calm about this, and I've got not problem with patience, I was happy to wait for responses and dicussion to pick up, I am frustrated that I called out in detail how I didn't want this thread to turn out, and people just ignored

Re: Rally the Troops LFS/BLFS/CLFS/Livecd too

Matt Darcy wrote: I was wrong and once again return to my belief that this mailing list is not working and needs to be moderated or subscription. This list *is( subscription only. -- JH -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscrib

Re: X.Org security vulnerability

On 5/3/06, Tim van der Molen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: : Thanks, Tim. Looks like a simple sed should patch this up. xorg-server-1.0.2: sed -i.bak 's/ntri & sizeof/ntri * sizeof/' render/mitri.c xorg-6.9.0 and 6.8.2 sed -i.bak

Re: Rally the Troops LFS/BLFS/CLFS/Livecd too

Bruce Dubbs wrote: Matt Darcy wrote: I'm really dissapointed that this thread has turned into a "support" thread for certain products and arguments over specifics. The whole point of this thread was to discuss the options and directions of the whole projects not answer specific questions about

Re: Rally the Troops LFS/BLFS/CLFS/Livecd too

There's nothing at all wrong with the mailing list. It's just the inherent nature of a project that is spread out among group of volunteers that don't always have time to discuss properly - the medium used is to discuss isn't to blame. In fact, it's good that you brought this up here becaus

Re: Rally the Troops LFS/BLFS/CLFS/Livecd too

Hi again, Sorry about the previous post. Slipped onto the send button. On 4/30/06, Matt Darcy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 1.) Kernel Headers, yes you knew this was coming but its certainly worth talking about, a lots been said on this but its really still unclear of direction. I suppose the di

Re: Rally the Troops LFS/BLFS/CLFS/Livecd too

Matt Darcy wrote: > I'm really dissapointed that this thread has turned into a "support" > thread for certain products and arguments over specifics. > > The whole point of this thread was to discuss the options and directions > of the whole projects not answer specific questions about certain hea

Re: Rally the Troops LFS/BLFS/CLFS/Livecd too

Hi everyone, On 4/30/06, Matt Darcy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 1.) Kernel Headers, yes you knew this was coming but its certainly worth talking about, a lots been said on this but its really still unclear of direction. I suppose the discussion should center around a.) Do we stick with LLH and p

Re: Rally the Troops LFS/BLFS/CLFS/Livecd too

Matt Darcy wrote: This mailing list is clearly not working, what is the point of trying to use this list to communicate with other developers when it is pretty clear that it is impossible to have a discussion on a topic despite clear requests to no do certain things, people still ignore it and

Re: Rally the Troops LFS/BLFS/CLFS/Livecd too

steve crosby wrote: On 5/1/06, Bryan Kadzban <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: a setup. The sticking point would be programs that include linux/.h or asm/.h, if there are any. And it sounds like there are glibc alternatives to all of those headers anyway, so it would be the program that's broken.

Re: Rally the Troops LFS/BLFS/CLFS/Livecd too

Bryan Kadzban wrote: steve crosby wrote: iptables is one such application - currently non functional with jim's script created headers, but have yet to identify why. I thought iptables required the "raw" kernel source anyway? Regardless, it's definitely one of the few Linux-specific programs.

Re: [RFC] Stable kernels

Jeremy Huntwork wrote: You forgot one. 4) Do as much of your work as you can via ssh on a dedicated server. :) I know anduin was being used by Dan for test builds. Bruce might be alright with letting you run LiveCD builds on it, if you ask nicely. This would also help me upload the built CD

Re: [RFC] Stable kernels

Alexander E. Patrakov wrote: Possible solutions: 1) In LFS book, point to linux-2.6.16.tar.bz2 and the "latest file named patch-2.6.16.x.bz2 downloadable from kernel.org". 2) Let LFS stay with full kernel tarballs, but put a LiveCD specific note in the README or /etc/issue that the kernel is

Re: [RFC] Stable kernels

Ken Moffat wrote: Now that we have maintenance of the stable kernel, I think we should point people to the latest incremental release of the same kernel version. So, if we release a book with 2.6.16.12 and subsequently 2.6.11.{13,14,15} are released, I'd hate to think that people would religio

Re: Samba and language settings

Thomas Trepl wrote: smbmount: gconv_db.c:232: __gconv_release_step: Assertion `step->__end_fct == ((void *)0)' failed. Aborted This is clearly either a bug in glibc or a case of memory corruption in smbmount. [EMAIL PROTECTED], both with and without [EMAIL PROTECTED] (which changes exactly n

[OT]Re: Grub

Jeremy Huntwork wrote: and you'll be reaching for some sort of a rescue dis{c,k} Even us Brits gave up on that one long ago, only the Romans are still using disci. :-) R. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the