Misstake
cp -av /etc/sysconfig/{ifconfig.eth0.ipv4,ifconfig.test}
edit /etc/sysconfig/ifconfig.test set ONBOOT=no to it.
then reboot the lfs system, you will see a warning.
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above
2011/9/1 Bruce Dubbs :
> xinglp wrote:
>> 2011/9/1 Bruce Dubbs :
>>> xinglp wrote:
2011/8/31 Bruce Dubbs :
> xinglp wrote:
>> This is a patch fix some issues I met.
> I'm looking at the changes, but don't see what problems they are trying
> to solve.
>
> In the rc scrip
2011/9/1 Bruce Dubbs :
> xinglp wrote:
>> 2011/9/1 Bruce Dubbs :
>>> xinglp wrote:
2011/8/31 Bruce Dubbs :
> xinglp wrote:
>> This is a patch fix some issues I met.
> I'm looking at the changes, but don't see what problems they are trying
> to solve.
>
> In the rc scrip
xinglp wrote:
> 2011/9/1 Bruce Dubbs :
>> xinglp wrote:
>>> 2011/8/31 Bruce Dubbs :
xinglp wrote:
> This is a patch fix some issues I met.
I'm looking at the changes, but don't see what problems they are trying
to solve.
In the rc script, I think the change you made wil
2011/9/1 Bruce Dubbs :
> xinglp wrote:
>> 2011/8/31 Bruce Dubbs :
>>> xinglp wrote:
This is a patch fix some issues I met.
>>> I'm looking at the changes, but don't see what problems they are trying
>>> to solve.
>>>
>>> In the rc script, I think the change you made will set IN_BOOT
>>> improp
xinglp wrote:
> 2011/8/31 Bruce Dubbs :
>> xinglp wrote:
>>> This is a patch fix some issues I met.
>> I'm looking at the changes, but don't see what problems they are trying
>> to solve.
>>
>> In the rc script, I think the change you made will set IN_BOOT
>> improperly if the user executes init to
This is the post that finally pointed me in the right direction:
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/pipermail/lfs-support/2010-December/040001.html
Even if I hadn't been able to pinpoint the problem to /tools/include, it was
nice to confirm that the issue was indeed something I had messed up earlier
On 08/31/2011 11:05 AM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> William Tracy wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> First, I would like to congratulate the LFS team on the 7.0 rc. Good job,
>> people. :-)
>>
>> I'm working through a build right now. I screwed up on the original build of
>> glibc, but did not notice until running th
Matthew Burgess wrote:
> On 31/08/2011 19:51, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>
>> Commenting out the line 'cp $in /t' does not seem to affect the test.
>> The question now is whether to do
>>
>> sed -i 's:\(cp $in /t\):#\1:' tests/unibyte-bracket-expr
>>
>> Or just delete the /t file that's created.
>
> I'd
Nathan Coulson wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 11:55 AM, Matthew Burgess
> wrote:
>> On 31/08/2011 18:51, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>>> I've noticed that there is a spurious file, /t, created in the latest
>>> builds of LFS. Â The file is 2 bytes long, a 0xff followed by a newline.
>>>
>>> It is a file
On 31/08/2011 19:51, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Commenting out the line 'cp $in /t' does not seem to affect the test.
> The question now is whether to do
>
> sed -i 's:\(cp $in /t\):#\1:' tests/unibyte-bracket-expr
>
> Or just delete the /t file that's created.
I'd prefer to prevent the file from being
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 8:51 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> I've noticed that there is a spurious file, /t, created in the latest
> builds of LFS. The file is 2 bytes long, a 0xff followed by a newline.
>
> It is a file generated by one of the tests in grep. I'm not sure how to
> find which test.
I w
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 11:55 AM, Matthew Burgess
wrote:
> On 31/08/2011 18:51, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>> I've noticed that there is a spurious file, /t, created in the latest
>> builds of LFS. The file is 2 bytes long, a 0xff followed by a newline.
>>
>> It is a file generated by one of the tests in
On 31/08/2011 18:51, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> I've noticed that there is a spurious file, /t, created in the latest
> builds of LFS. The file is 2 bytes long, a 0xff followed by a newline.
>
> It is a file generated by one of the tests in grep. I'm not sure how to
> find which test. It appears to be
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> I've noticed that there is a spurious file, /t, created in the latest
> builds of LFS. The file is 2 bytes long, a 0xff followed by a newline.
>
> It is a file generated by one of the tests in grep. I'm not sure how to
> find which test. It appears to be harmless and the e
I've noticed that there is a spurious file, /t, created in the latest
builds of LFS. The file is 2 bytes long, a 0xff followed by a newline.
It is a file generated by one of the tests in grep. I'm not sure how to
find which test. It appears to be harmless and the easiest way to
address it is
William Tracy wrote:
> Hello,
>
> First, I would like to congratulate the LFS team on the 7.0 rc. Good job,
> people. :-)
>
> I'm working through a build right now. I screwed up on the original build of
> glibc, but did not notice until running the test listed in section 5.8 of
> the book.
>
> I
17 matches
Mail list logo
