On Friday 09 February 2007 01:04, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> The easiest way would be to create a trunk/BOOK/images/ directory in
> subversion and populate it with the images. The LFS Makefile right now
> does:
>
> cp $(XSLROOTDIR)/images/*.png $(BASEDIR)/images
>
> But that makes the book dependent o
Alexander E. Patrakov wrote these words on 02/08/07 21:18 CST:
> And, while we are discussing the XML topic, I would like someone to look at
> this file from DIY-linux and tell me if this is a valid BLFS XML setup
> criticism:
>
> http://cvs.diy-linux.org/index.cgi/*checkout*/refbuild/README?re
Matthew Burgess wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> Do you think it's worth creating a branch so we can work on updating the book
> rendering infrastructure? This way, if we can't get it sorted in time for a
> release we simply don't merge from that branch? It also means that folks
> with an interest in t
Randy McMurchy wrote:
> Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 02/08/07 19:04 CST:
>
>> But that makes the book dependent on another package. Larry put the
>> images for BLFS into subversion in May 2004. I never noticed before
>> that LFS did it differently.
>
> Didn't we just have this discussion? O
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 02/08/07 20:33 CST:
> Addressing the issues above:
>
> 1. The five images take up less than 4K. SVN control of *all* the
> content in the book is much more important than an upgrade that may
> happen automatically. If a change is made, I'd like us to do it expl
Relocated from lfs-dev
Randy McMurchy wrote:
> Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 02/08/07 19:58 CST:
>> Randy McMurchy wrote:
>>> 1) We don't have to piggy-back the images along as they are already
>>>available on disk.
>>> 2) The images are updated in our book as they are updated in the XSL
>>
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 02/08/07 19:58 CST:
> Randy McMurchy wrote:
>> 1) We don't have to piggy-back the images along as they are already
>>available on disk.
>> 2) The images are updated in our book as they are updated in the XSL
>>stylesheets.
>
> Well, I don't recall the conver
Randy McMurchy wrote:
> Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 02/08/07 19:04 CST:
>
>> But that makes the book dependent on another package. Larry put the
>> images for BLFS into subversion in May 2004. I never noticed before
>> that LFS did it differently.
>
> Didn't we just have this discussion? O
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 02/08/07 19:04 CST:
> But that makes the book dependent on another package. Larry put the
> images for BLFS into subversion in May 2004. I never noticed before
> that LFS did it differently.
Didn't we just have this discussion? Or one similar? Seems we did.
Howe
Randy McMurchy wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I noticed this (and since fixed) in my personal render script, but
> on Quantum the images are not being popluated (due to we don't use
> a "current" dir any longer), so no images are displayed when viewing
> the development book on-line.
The easiest way would
On 2/8/07, Matthew Burgess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Do you think it's worth creating a branch so we can work on updating the book
> rendering infrastructure? This way, if we can't get it sorted in time for a
> release we simply don't merge from that branch? It also means that folks
> with a
Hi folks,
Do you think it's worth creating a branch so we can work on updating the book
rendering infrastructure? This way, if we can't get it sorted in time for a
release we simply don't merge from that branch? It also means that folks
with an interest in this can contribute and relieve some
M.Canales.es wrote these words on 02/08/07 14:06 CST:
> But I will agree if you can investigate how FOP-0.93, and it dependencies,
> should be installed.
I'm already on that one. There's no reason that BLFS trunk can't be
updated with it.
--
Randy
rmlscsi: [bogomips 1003.26] [GNU ld version 2
El Jueves, 8 de Febrero de 2007 20:44, Dan Nicholson escribió:
>
> I'd like to second that we wait on the book source conversion for a
> release. This will have to happen sooner or later, and after
> BLFS-6.2.0 is as good a time as any. This doesn't mean we can't keep
> moving the book towards rel
On 2/8/07, Ken Moffat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I try not to look at the detail of glibc if I don't have to.
> Certainly, it ought to be calling itself 2.5. On clfs Jim has
> prepared a "somewhat larger" patch (about 1.6MB) - most of it is
> translation updates for various locales, but there
El Jueves, 8 de Febrero de 2007 20:17, Matthew Burgess escribió:
> 1. Wait for BLFS-6.2 to be released - we don't want to be screwing with
> Quantum's rendering infrastructure so close to a release. It'd also be
> nice to have the DocBook-4.5 instructions in BLFS and installed on Quantum
> accord
On 2/8/07, M.Canales.es <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> El Jueves, 8 de Febrero de 2007 20:05, Matthew Burgess escribió:
>
> > I'll go through Trac and reassess milestones and such like tonight, but I
> > think a 6.3 release within 1 month is feasible. Does everyone else agree?
>
> That would meant n
On Thu, Feb 08, 2007 at 07:05:25PM +, Matthew Burgess wrote:
> Anything that helps everyone's sterling efforts over in BLFS-land is fine by
> me! I'd like to get GCC-4.1.2 and at least some of the Glibc fixes in. I've
> not even had a chance to look at that patch yet. I think we can then
El Jueves, 8 de Febrero de 2007 20:05, Matthew Burgess escribió:
> I'll go through Trac and reassess milestones and such like tonight, but I
> think a 6.3 release within 1 month is feasible. Does everyone else agree?
That would meant not time to me to do the update to
DB-XML-4.5+DB-XSL-1.72.1+F
On Thursday 08 February 2007 18:22, M.Canales.es wrote:
> I'm waiting 1.72.1 release to start working on the update. Also, the DTD
> need be updated to 4.5.
As we've now got a fair number of tickets concerning rendering of the book,
how does the following approach sound?
1. Wait for BLFS-6.2 to
Matthew Burgess wrote these words on 02/08/07 13:05 CST:
> I'll go through Trac and reassess milestones and such like tonight, but I
> think a 6.3 release within 1 month is feasible. Does everyone else agree?
Sounds good, Matt. And actually, there's no rush, I just mentioned
it to stimulate som
On Thursday 08 February 2007 06:52, Randy McMurchy wrote:
> I propose that we announce a plan to release LFS-6.3.It sure would
> make life easy over on the BLFS side with this 6.2 branch we have
> that targets LFS 6.2. An LFS 6.3 release would eliminate the need
> for us over in BLFS to maintain t
El Jueves, 8 de Febrero de 2007 15:40, Dan Nicholson escribió:
>
> I completely forgot about this. Sorry. I think you need to use 1.69.1.
> According to our local XSL guru, our book is broken using newer
> versions.
>
> http://wiki.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/ticket/2088
That ticket was about 1.70.
Hi all,
I noticed this (and since fixed) in my personal render script, but
on Quantum the images are not being popluated (due to we don't use
a "current" dir any longer), so no images are displayed when viewing
the development book on-line.
--
Randy
rmlscsi: [bogomips 1003.26] [GNU ld version 2
Dan Nicholson wrote these words on 02/08/07 09:41 CST:
>>> http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/patches/downloads/glibc/glibc-2.5-branch_update-1.patch
>> But that is for the 2.4 branch, right? Not saying we need it or
>> not, just identifying that I remember that it was for the old
>> kernel series. Or
On 2/8/07, Randy McMurchy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dan Nicholson wrote these words on 02/08/07 08:27 CST:
> > Robert has put together a patch with updates from the
> > upstream 2.5 branch. We may want to apply some or all of it:
> >
> > http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/patches/downloads/glibc/gl
Dan Nicholson wrote these words on 02/08/07 08:27 CST:
> Robert has put together a patch with updates from the
> upstream 2.5 branch. We may want to apply some or all of it:
>
> http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/patches/downloads/glibc/glibc-2.5-branch_update-1.patch
But that is for the 2.4 branch,
On 2/8/07, Ken Moffat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 03, 2007 at 01:28:35AM +0100, Giulio Daprelà wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > I'm the coordinator for the italian translation of the LFS book.
> > I'm trying to render the book (LFS 6.2) starting from the xml sources,
> > but I have problems.
> >
On 2/8/07, Alexander E. Patrakov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Randy McMurchy wrote:
>
> > The current LFS SVN has an entirely upgraded toolchain, and many
> > updates to core packages since the 6.2 release. I just built it and
> > it appears rock solid.
>
> That's because you didn't use any CFLAGS.
On 2/7/07, Randy McMurchy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I propose that we announce a plan to release LFS-6.3. It sure would
> make life easy over on the BLFS side with this 6.2 branch we have
> that targets LFS 6.2. An LFS 6.3 release would eliminate the need
> for us over in BLFS to maintain the
On Sat, Feb 03, 2007 at 01:28:35AM +0100, Giulio Daprelà wrote:
> Hi all,
> I'm the coordinator for the italian translation of the LFS book.
> I'm trying to render the book (LFS 6.2) starting from the xml sources,
> but I have problems.
>
> The release of the stylesheets called (1.69.1) is not pre
steve crosby wrote:
> Thats not the experience I have here - temporary rules are created in
> /dev/.udev, and correctly copied from there to the /etc/udev/rules.d
> directory by the udev_retry bootscript. Or is this related to network
> cards only? (my temporary rules are for cd-rom naming)
>
> Th
On 2/8/07, Alexander E. Patrakov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Randy McMurchy wrote:
>
> > The current LFS SVN has an entirely upgraded toolchain, and many
> > updates to core packages since the 6.2 release. I just built it and
> > it appears rock solid.
>
> That's because you didn't use any CFLAGS.
Randy McMurchy wrote:
> The current LFS SVN has an entirely upgraded toolchain, and many
> updates to core packages since the 6.2 release. I just built it and
> it appears rock solid.
That's because you didn't use any CFLAGS. If you had -Os in CFLAGS, you
would hit ticket #1935.
> Booted withou
34 matches
Mail list logo
