Dan Nicholson wrote:
> On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 1:00 PM, Jeremy Huntwork
> wrote:
>> On 5/28/12 2:52 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>>> The problem is that none of these libraries are used for udev. On a
>>> recent blfs system, where the systemd dependent libraries are installed,
>>> I as able to build an
I've placed a raw LFS system at
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~bdubbs/systemd-udev/.
It can be extracted to a empty partition
tar -xf lfs-SVN-20120524.tar.xz --strip-components=2
If that partition is set up as /mnt/lfs, you can chroot into it and then
experiment with a bare system. It's
Bryan Kadzban wrote:
> Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>> You are not doing this in an LFS Chapter 6 type of environment. I did
>> this and immediately got:
>
> Yeah, you're right, see my reply to Ken. No system in the proper state
> to test that at the moment. :-(
>
>> Anouther problem is that src/shared
Bryan Kadzban wrote:
> Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>> Perhaps it's because I invested so much work in the last couple of days,
>> but I am leaning towards static linking of udevd and udevadm. At least
>> the udev part.
>
> ldd /usr/bin/Xorg
> linux-vdso.so.1 => (0x7fff4455c000)
> li
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> You are not doing this in an LFS Chapter 6 type of environment. I did
> this and immediately got:
Yeah, you're right, see my reply to Ken. No system in the proper state
to test that at the moment. :-(
> Anouther problem is that src/shared/util.c is needed to build the ude
Ken Moffat wrote:
> My first thought was "I wonder how he's disabled the tests for
> intltool and XML::Parser?". You're on a completed system.
Arg, you're right of course. (I don't have a chapter-6-level system
handy to use for testing, hence my comment earlier about missing some of
the required
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Perhaps it's because I invested so much work in the last couple of days,
> but I am leaning towards static linking of udevd and udevadm. At least
> the udev part.
ldd /usr/bin/Xorg
linux-vdso.so.1 => (0x7fff4455c000)
libudev.so.0 => /usr/lib64/libudev.s
Ken Moffat wrote:
> On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 06:50:07PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>> Ken Moffat wrote:
>> The standard seems to be:
>>
>> /lib/libudev.so.0.13.1
>
> libudev.so.1.0.0 for 183
OK
>> /lib/libudev.so.0 -> libudev.so.0.13.1
>> /usr/lib/libudev.so -> ../../lib/libudev.so.0.13.1
>> /u
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 07:21:27PM +0200, Armin K. wrote:
>
> Alright ... Here's one crazy idea. I am unable to follow your discussion
> and build system development, but you can try the following:
>
> 1. Extract udev-182 (last standalone version)
> 2. Merge source files changes from 183 into th
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 06:50:07PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Ken Moffat wrote:
> > On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 04:55:40PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>
> >> I'll try to create a dynamic udev library in my script.
>
> OK, I was successful. It was a bit tricky. First, the order of what is
> on the co
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 10:12:10PM +0100, Matt Burgess wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-05-30 at 05:33 -0700, Dan Nicholson wrote:
> > On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 1:00 PM, Jeremy Huntwork
> >
> > Have any of you guys considered actually making patches and sending
> > them upstream? The autotools are not that sca
Ken Moffat wrote:
> On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 04:55:40PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>> I'll try to create a dynamic udev library in my script.
OK, I was successful. It was a bit tricky. First, the order of what is
on the command line to link is significant.
Second, many of the programs are compil
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 04:55:40PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Ken Moffat wrote:
> >
> > The bad: I cannot compile xf86-input-evdev, it needs libudev.pc or
> > flags pointing it to libudev. For me, this is a showstopper.
>
> I went to the source of xf86-input-evdev-2.6.0 and did:
>
>grep -
Ken Moffat wrote:
> On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 11:42:41PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>> Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>>
>> I rebooted and udev from systemd seems to work with the patch. I
>> updated the patch (same location, timestamp 29-May-2012 22:28) because I
>> forgot to create /lib/udev/devices/{null,pt
On Wed, 2012-05-30 at 05:33 -0700, Dan Nicholson wrote:
> On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 1:00 PM, Jeremy Huntwork
> wrote:
> > On 5/28/12 2:52 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> >> The problem is that none of these libraries are used for udev. On a
> >> recent blfs system, where the systemd dependent libraries ar
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 11:42:41PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>
> I rebooted and udev from systemd seems to work with the patch. I
> updated the patch (same location, timestamp 29-May-2012 22:28) because I
> forgot to create /lib/udev/devices/{null,pts}. The latest patch n
Armin K. wrote:
> Alright ... Here's one crazy idea. I am unable to follow your discussion
> and build system development, but you can try the following:
>
> 1. Extract udev-182 (last standalone version)
> 2. Merge source files changes from 183 into that tree.
> 3. Package pure udev 183 tarball
Ken Moffat wrote:
> On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 09:36:07PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>> Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>>> Ken Moffat wrote:
>>>
You seem to be making good progress here.
>>> Try the attached patch.
>>>
>>> tar -xf systemd-183.tar.xz
>>> cd systemd-183
>>> patch -Np1 -i ../systemd-lfs.patch
Ken Moffat wrote:
>
> Obviously /lib64 because you are on multilib. We'll use /lib, but
> I guess the shared lib needs to be accessible from /usr/lib.
We really don't want udev libraries on /usr. They are used early in the
boot process before (potentially) mounting /usr.
Perhaps it's becaus
On 05/30/2012 07:12 PM, Ken Moffat wrote:
> On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 09:36:07PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>> Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>>> Ken Moffat wrote:
>>>
You seem to be making good progress here.
>>>
>>> Try the attached patch.
>>>
>>> tar -xf systemd-183.tar.xz
>>> cd systemd-183
>>> patch -
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 09:36:07PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> > Ken Moffat wrote:
> >
> >> You seem to be making good progress here.
> >
> > Try the attached patch.
> >
> > tar -xf systemd-183.tar.xz
> > cd systemd-183
> > patch -Np1 -i ../systemd-lfs.patch
> > sh make.s
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 11:48:22AM -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>
> You are not doing this in an LFS Chapter 6 type of environment. I did
> this and immediately got:
>
> ./configure: line 12067: intltool-update: command not found
> checking for intltool >= 0.40.0... found
> configure: error: Your
Bryan Kadzban wrote:
> Bryan Kadzban wrote:
>> Upgrading kmod now; will see what I hit next. This might just work;
>> let's see. :-)
>
> Got it to compile all the binaries (I think) we need, by removing a
> couple of totally unnecessary dependencies from libsystemd-label. :-)
>
> Reformatting
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 11:24:39PM -0700, Bryan Kadzban wrote:
>
> seems to generate the right set of binaries and files under
> /tmp/udev-test. Of course we still have to rename
> /lib/udev/systemd-udevd to plain old /lib/udev/udevd. (Or change the
> target in rootlibexecdir, actually. Looks like
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 10:32:29PM -0700, Bryan Kadzban wrote:
> Bryan Kadzban wrote:
> > Upgrading kmod now; will see what I hit next. This might just work;
> > let's see. :-)
>
> Got it to compile all the binaries (I think) we need, by removing a
> couple of totally unnecessary dependencies f
On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 1:00 PM, Jeremy Huntwork
wrote:
> On 5/28/12 2:52 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>> The problem is that none of these libraries are used for udev. On a
>> recent blfs system, where the systemd dependent libraries are installed,
>> I as able to build and looked at the executables a
On 29-05-2012 21:04, Fernando de Oliveira wrote:
[...]
> Yes, I do have it enabled in all 5 machines. [...] I will try to
> find differences and similarities between them.
LFS6.5, 6.7, 6.8, 7.0 and 7.1. Some are svn versions after the
respective version.
Problem appeared building kernel 3.4.0
On Tue, 29 May 2012 23:42:41 -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>
> Otherwise I think the patch is good. If someone (Matt?) can test and
> confirm that it works, I'll put it in the book.
Sure, I'll try to kick off a test build tonight, once I've committed my
pending patches.
Thanks to everyone for the
28 matches
Mail list logo
