On Thu, 14 Nov 2013 09:25:25 +0100, Pierre Labastie
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Have you seen the thread on -support starting on nov 4: "Check-0.9.10
> can't find subunit/child.h - LFS 7.4"?
>
> It turns out that if both libsubunit and pkgconfig are installed on the
> host, check's configure believes it c
On Mon, 21 Oct 2013 20:41:52 -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> I just ran jhalfs against the latest files and had one anomaly in the
> new make-4.0 checks:
>
> functions/file ..
> *** Test died (functions/file): Opened read-only file!
>
> FAILED (2/2 passed)
> -
On Mon, 21 Oct 2013 10:02:13 +0200, Pierre Labastie
wrote:
>
> Actually,
> chapter 7 has never been updated for systemd, even in the systemd book.
> Not sure it is needed though. When I made the tickets, that book was
> maintained, so I thought the tickets might help. But there have been
> no upd
On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 13:00:27 +0200, Igor Živković
wrote:
> checking for CHECK... no
> configure: error: Package requirements (check >= 0.9.4) were not met:
>
> No package 'check' found
>
> Consider adjusting the PKG_CONFIG_PATH environment variable if you
> installed software in a non-standard
Thanks for the patch! If Bruce doesn't pick this up before I do
this evening (GMT) then I'll apply it. One additional observation...
On Wed, 4 Sep 2013 07:32:06 +, theart...@zoho.com wrote:
> Index: 7.4-rc2/chapter07/udev.xml
>
On Wed, 21 Aug 2013 21:20:43 +0800, JC Chong wrote:
> Hello,
>
> The HSR may need some updating.
>
> Using an LFS 6.6 host with GCC 4.4.x, I wasn't able to build kmod 14, as I
> keep getting: undefined reference to `_Static_assert' errors. kmod 13
> builds just fine though. (LFS 6.6 successfully
On Tue, 20 Aug 2013 08:46:07 -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Armin K. wrote:
>> On 08/20/2013 02:55 PM, bdu...@higgs.linuxfromscratch.org wrote:
>>> Author: bdubbs
>>> Date: Tue Aug 20 05:55:18 2013
>>> New Revision: 10321
>
>>> -vmlinux-&linux-version;-lfs-&version;-&linux-version;, and
>>>
On Sun, 18 Aug 2013 16:20:00 +0100, Ken Moffat wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 18, 2013 at 03:22:07AM +0100, Ken Moffat wrote:
>> On Sat, Aug 17, 2013 at 08:39:57PM +0100, Matt Burgess wrote:
>> > On Tue, 2013-08-13 at 15:00 -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>> >
>> > > 103-automake:FAIL: t/primary-prefix-invalid-co
On Sat, 03 Aug 2013 18:07:43 -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> With that in mind, I would like to freeze LFS (mostly) on August 15 and
> release LFS-7.4-rc1. The target date for LFS-7.4 will be 1 September.
> During the freeze period, some packages may be updated, but not gcc,
> binutils, or glibc. A
On Thu, 21 Mar 2013 14:13:54 +0100, Pierre Labastie
wrote:
> Just for you to know: LVM could not be built with udev-lfs-198-2. Builds
> OK with 198-3.
> Thanks.
Thanks, Pierre. With Armin's patch now in, we should be able to prevent issues
like that from occurring again.
Regards,
Matt.
--
h
On Thu, 07 Mar 2013 22:20:23 +0100, Pierre Labastie
wrote:
> I really meant --with-sysroot. That switch is defined in ld's configure,
> not the top one.
> (it might be better to use --with-sysroot=/, but --with-sysroot
> works for me).
I *always* forget about binutils' configure machinery allow
On Fri, 01 Mar 2013 16:00:48 +0100, Pierre Labastie
wrote:
> Not a big deal, but this should be:
>
> instead of
>
Thanks, Pierre. Fixed now.
Regards,
Matt.
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above informat
On Mon, 18 Feb 2013 00:22:00 -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>> Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>>> at least using jhalfs. It seems to build the executable OK, but then
>>>
>>> makeinfo --split-size=500 --split-size=500 --no-split -I . -I
>>> ../../gcc-4.7.2/gcc/doc \
>>>-I ../.
On Fri, 15 Feb 2013 17:31:05 +1300, cybertao wrote:
> I just finished building this, ironed out my mistakes (journald barfing
> because there's no machine-id is a good one!), and couldn't be more
> pleased
> with myself. And immensely grateful for all the work that went into this.
Thanks for the
On Wed, 13 Feb 2013 11:02:41 +, lf...@cruziero.com (akhiezer) wrote:
> "Generates header files that can be read by gettext."
>
> Shouldn't the '.' be outside of the xml 'command' tag
Right you are. Well spotted. Fixed in r10137.
Regards,
Matt.
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/list
On Tue, 12 Feb 2013 14:45:36 +, lf...@cruziero.com (akhiezer) wrote:
> Hi,
>
> There appears to be no entry for 'Libpipeline' on the 'Rationale ...' page
> ('.../prologue/package-choices...') in the lfs book, for lfs versions
> SVN-20130211, 7.2, 7.1, and 7.0 .
>
> If a package is deemed 'im
On Tue, 12 Feb 2013 01:48:28 +0100, "Armin K." wrote:
> Also, I just merged expat into systemd branch, but there is no commit
> message. I am subscribed to lfs-book. What am I doing wrong?
Bruce already covered the commit message issue. I've actually got all of
systemd and its dependencies in m
On Tue, 13 Nov 2012 22:44:27 +0800, xinglp wrote:
> Creating and cleaning /home//tmp
> Processing bootscripts...
> Validating the book...
> index.xml:57: element varlistentry: validity error : Element varlistentry
> content does not follow the DTD, expecting (term+ , listitem), got (term
> listite
On Thu, 04 Oct 2012 08:09:50 -0400, Baho Utot wrote:
> The file system is ext3 the same as on each box. Rsync is not an option
> as only the desktop machine has it at this time.
> cp -av doesn't work either, the copy never happens but the result in the
> term shows every thing copied and worke
On Tue, 2 Oct 2012 14:14:26 + (UTC), Chris W.
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I wanted to better understand the inner workings of systemd. Just having
> finished a LFS install on a test server, I thought LFS 7.2 might be a
> good basis for this.
>
> I hope you'll find this guide helpful and would we
And further to Ken's observation, this took about
2 hrs 15 to hit my inbox after posting. Bruce, would you
mind taking a look at mailman to see if it's too busy
processing spam or whatever it was that caused this last
time please?
Thanks,
Matt.
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/l
On Thu, 9 Aug 2012 23:15:32 +0800, xinglp wrote:
> Maybe we should replace "ip addr show ${IFACE}" with "ip -f inet addr
> show ${IFACE}".
It would help if you explained *why* you think this needs changing.
Does the current code not work? If so, how does the bug/issue manifest
itself?
> The lat
On Tue, 07 Aug 2012 11:18:55 +0200, "Armin K." wrote:
> Heh sorry, changelog says 2.6.1 was added 2 days ago.
Doh, mea culpa. Bison had a new release while I was working on my
patch set. I bumped the version in packages.ent and forgot to bump it in
the changelog. I'll fix up tonight!
Thanks,
On Mon, 30 Jul 2012 10:24:31 -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> According to the udev-182 rule, the vmware nics have a mac address of
> 00:0c:29:xx:xx:xx or 00:50:56:xx:xx:xx. That matches the only version
> of vmware that I have access to. That rule,
> 75-persistent-net-generator.rules, skips running
On Sun, 29 Jul 2012 18:05:32 -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Two questions still arise. Does LFS need to be able to support this
> unusual configuration "out of the box"? Does the virtual multi-nic
> configuration need to be set in the udev rules prior to the first boot?
Well, I don't see how this
On Wed, 11 Jul 2012 10:47:33 +0100, Andrew Benton wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Jul 2012 22:55:42 +0100
> Matt Burgess wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 2012-07-01 at 18:20 +0100, Andrew Benton wrote:
>>
>> > (We won't hit the libgcc_s.so problem with Gcc until we start using
>> > Gcc-4.7.2)
>>
>> Hi Andy, I've finally
On Thu, 28 Jun 2012 12:07:37 +0100, Andrew Benton wrote:
> Hello All
>
>>From the "that's what you get for touching that" dept:
>
> I've been testing the development versions of gcc and glibc (from svn
> and git) and lately I've seen some breakage related to libgcc_s.so.
>
> Current Glibc fails
On Tue, 19 Jun 2012 08:40:39 -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Armin K. wrote:
>> For those of you not following systemd-devel mailing list, here are some
>> responses from Lennart regarding systemd and udev split.
>
> I figured we'd get that type of response, if any at all.
Given the noises upstream
On Wed, 06 Jun 2012 10:57:21 -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> I suggest this topic be dropped as moot. The discussion doesn't add
> anything and we are agreed that today 3.4.1 is the latest stable version.
On the contrary, I think it's important that folks here understand a bit
about the kernel deve
On Sun, 2012-06-03 at 12:22 +0100, Jeremy Henty wrote:
> Comparing my old LFS 6.6 with my new LFS 6.7 I see that:
>
>LFS 6.6 (gmp-5.0.0):
> libgmp.a
> libgmp.la
> libgmp.so
> libgmp.so.3
> libgmp.so.3.6.0
>
>LFS 6.7 (gmp-5.0.1):
> libgmp.a
>
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
On Tue, 29 May 2012 09:02:17 -0700 (PDT), Fernando de Oliveira
wrote:
> Digging into this since yesterday evening, discovered first that 3.4 is
> dev and stable version is 3.3.7, second, the error is well known:
>
> http://us.generation-nt.com/answer/linux-next-build-failure-after-merge-final-t
On Mon, 23 Apr 2012 12:01:33 -0600, Matthew Burgess
wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Apr 2012 12:48:37 -0500, Bruce Dubbs
> wrote:
>
>> I'm in the middle of a jh build right now. Just finishing up Chapter 5.
>> I'll take a look when it completes. The toolchain built w
On Mon, 23 Apr 2012 12:48:37 -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> I'm in the middle of a jh build right now. Just finishing up Chapter 5.
> I'll take a look when it completes. The toolchain built without complaint.
Thanks. Note that the sed added in r9799 masks the test failures so you may
want to re
On Mon, 23 Apr 2012 13:23:58 -0400, Jeremy Huntwork
wrote:
> On 4/23/12 1:11 PM, Pierre Labastie wrote:
>> The reason is that /tools/bin/su cannot work for a normal user,
>> because the setuid bit cannot be set at install in chapter 5 (if
>> installing as user lfs). Hence the choice of naming it
That's because we (LFS) dropped the uname patch from
our build instructions because upstream won't take
it in its current form. If my understanding is
correct, the correct way of implementing this feature
is by a combination of changes in the kernel & Glibc.
I don't have the skill necessary to do
On Wed, 28 Mar 2012 10:23:57 +0200, Pierre Labastie
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The binutils patch in chapter05/binutils-pass{1,2} should be applied
> before changing directory to binutils-build:-) . Chapter06/binutils is OK.
See, that's what I get from breaking from my normal practice of running things
t
On Tue, 27 Mar 2012 15:01:59 +0200, Pierre Labastie
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've tried the last svn version on my old pentium-m
> laptop.
>
> 1- The error:
>
> /mnt/lfs/sources/libc-build/math/s_frexp.os.dt -MT
> /mnt/lfs/sources/libc-build/math/s_frexp.os
> ./sysdeps/i386/fpu/s_frexp.S: Assembler me
On Mon, 26 Mar 2012 18:32:41 +0200, Pierre Labastie
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Successful build up to gcc-pass2 as per Jeremy's new build method,
> gcc-4.7+glibc-2.15:
Thanks for your notes. For the time being, I'm going to make the minimum
changes
necessary to get LFS built with GCC-4.7.0 and Glibc-2.
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 11:24:27 +, Andrew Benton wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 09:47:18 +
> Matthew Burgess wrote:
>
>> I must admit to being really confused by your need for these
> workarounds.
>
> Me too. It makes me feel stupid.
I think you're being a bit
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 09:36:15 +, Andrew Benton wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 00:19:46 +
> Matt Burgess wrote:
>
>> OK, the paragraph above your output stated that it "fails for me at the
>> first pass of gcc", hence why I tested against the first pass of GCC.
>> That said, I *now* notice
On Wed, 22 Feb 2012 10:02:24 +0100, Pierre Labastie
wrote:
> Should be corrected in current upstream patch list. Do not know
> if you LFS devs think it is a big issue (having math.h needlessly
> included when ncurses C++ bindings are used). I suggest
> waiting for the next release of ncurses.
Y
On Mon, 20 Feb 2012 10:16:07 -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> I guess I never see the problem since I don't use jhalfs to check out
> the version for me.
Neither do I; I only build from a local working copy.
> Matt should throw in his 2 cents, but I don't see a
> value to the BOOK level in tags.
On Fri, 17 Feb 2012 10:30:06 +0100, Pierre Labastie
wrote:
> Le 17/02/2012 07:37, xinglp a écrit :
>> This is the log produced by jhalfs, some errors in it, but it worked
>> well when build lfs.
> Thanks for the report. I knew that, but the reason is outside
> jhalfs. It is in the Makefile of the
On Thu, 16 Feb 2012 09:51:34 +0100, Jean-Philippe MENGUAL
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> An user suggested some fix for the book, in particular for wget-list.
Those links don't exist in the current SVN trunk version of the book at
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/development/chapter03/packages.html.
On Mon, 06 Feb 2012 11:00:31 -0500, Jeremy Huntwork
wrote:
> Was just reviewing your kmod build instructions - haven't built it yet
> myself, but it's noticeably missing lsmod - shouldn't this be another
> symlink to kmod?
Yup, if you look closely you'll notice I added it to the list of installe
On Thu, 02 Feb 2012 03:44:55 -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> I built LFS tonight on a kvm VM. Here are a couple of comments:
>
> The total build time was 6.3 hours. The last build (LFS 7.0) on the
> same machine, but on the HW was 4.1 hours. That's a 50% increase in
> time. I'm not sure why.
Bui
On Thu, 26 Jan 2012 18:27:04 +0100, Pierre Labastie
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I wonder if anybody still uses jhalfs, and if he(she) has tried ICA
> lately.
I use jhalfs all the time, but I've never done an ICA build with it.
> ICA is broken because of the part in glibc's instructions, which
> instructs
On Thu, 26 Jan 2012 10:11:26 +, Firerat wrote:
> Hi
> I noticed a small problem with kmod-4 in the current svn ( 9714 )
> the book details
>
> ./test/test-loaded
>
> to perform tests, however for me this fails ( no file found )
> if I instead do
>
> make check
>
> the tests are per
On Mon, 16 Jan 2012 11:47:10 -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> I don't want to step on Matt's toes, but I'm going to make a change in
> the bootscripts and section 8.2/8.3 in a couple of minutes.
No probs, Bruce. As per $subject, my patch is WIP, so feel free to make
any changes. My patch workflow le
Markku Pesonen wrote
>iproute2 doesn't even use the headers. See this commit in upstream:
>http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/shemminger/iproute2.git;a=commit;h=13603f6a9e46f08576f6284a0ef1ce1fbf94ffe0
Nice! I'll try a libnl-less build tonight with relevant seds to prevent
iproute2 from
On 12/12/11 22:12, Jean-Philippe MENGUAL wrote:
> Hi,
>
> At chapter 6.19, bzip2, in lfs 7.0 and newer, I note:
> "Compile and check the package:
>
> make"
>
> A French user tells me that we should add "make check".
A quick look at my logs shows that 'make' does in fact compile and check
the Bz
On Thu, 1 Dec 2011 16:22:18 -0800 (PST), Fernando de Oliveira
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The upgrade from e2fsprogs-1.41.14 to e2fsprogs-1.42 is successful in LFS
> 6.7 and 6.8, but not 6.5, with
>
> ../configure --prefix=/usr --with-root-prefix="" \
> --enable-elf-shlibs --disable-libblkid --disable
On Sat, 26 Nov 2011 22:19:59 -0600, DJ Lucas wrote:
> On 11/26/2011 10:02 PM, DJ Lucas wrote:
>> On 11/26/2011 09:27 PM, DJ Lucas wrote:
>>> Latest gettext configure can hang in chapter 5 on "checking where .elc
>>> files should go..." if emacs is installed on the host. Should probably
>>> add "--
On 22/11/2011 19:49, Ken Moffat wrote:
> For LFS-svn, there is *always* a possibility of breakage as soon as
> you get into BLFS. Unlikely, but possible. With a fair wind, those
> sort of problems will mostly be caught by the time a new LFS is
> released. To be honest, I can't remember the las
On 25/10/2011 20:01, Matthew Burgess wrote:
> On 25/10/2011 19:54, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>
>> OK, I am busy with blfs right now. Can you do both tickets?
>
> Sure thing.
Hi Bruce,
As you'll have seen, I've just closed the last 3 tickets for 7.0. I
think we're al
On 25/10/2011 19:54, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> OK, I am busy with blfs right now. Can you do both tickets?
Sure thing.
Regards,
Matt.
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
On 25/10/2011 19:06, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Reference http://wiki.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/ticket/2937
>
> 3.0.8 or 3.1? Changing the kernel is not particularly hard, but we need
> to go ahead and publish 7.0. -rc2 has been out for 2 weeks and there
> have only been minor changes. We need to keep
On Thu, 20 Oct 2011 15:48:17 +0200, feralert wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> As I am new in LFS and this is my first attempt, I have a couple of
> comments that might help make the book easier to follow (at least to a
> non-english newbie like me).
Firstly, welcome!
> - While going through the book the re
On 16/10/2011 19:50, Ken Moffat wrote:
> Is there a problem with the LFS server ? I'm getting mail from the
> lists, but I can't connect to linuxfromscratch.org using a browser
> (times out), and if I try 'svn up' the remote connection is reported
> as getting closed. And ssh appears not to wor
On 08/10/2011 16:33, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Right. I'll fix that today.
>
> -- Bruce
>
Thanks for that, Bruce. My working copy had that in (it had to have
done, otherwise my jhalfs based build would have failed), but somehow it
got lost. It must have just been a quilt-related screw up on my
On 05/10/2011 23:24, Matthew Burgess wrote:
> On 05/10/2011 22:48, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>
>> That sounds like a nice simple approach. Does it still place its .pc
>> files in /usr/lib/pkgconfig?
>
> Hi Bruce,
>
> Here's the complete patch I've kicked off a
On 05/10/2011 22:48, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
That sounds like a nice simple approach. Does it still place its .pc
files in /usr/lib/pkgconfig?
Hi Bruce,
Here's the complete patch I've kicked off a test build with. Your
machine may just beat mine though, if you want to verify it :-)
Regards,
On Tue, 04 Oct 2011 20:53:52 -0400, John Stanley
wrote:
> There doesn't seem to be an easy way to turn off the
> libffi requirement, which is unfortunate, as libglib itself
> doesn't need it. On the other hand, I've been building
> lfs/blfs-like systems for several years now, and end up
> ins
On Tue, 04 Oct 2011 21:45:13 -0700, Bryan Kadzban
wrote:
> See the attached patch for what I propose we do, at least in the short
> term, or possibly longer as well.
>
> It changes udev_retry to (in addition to using --type=failed) read
> /etc/sysconfig/udev_retry (name TBD, but this works for m
On 30/09/2011 00:44, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> The help-version test is doing:
>
> for i in $built_programs; do
> v=$(env $i --version | sed -n '1s/.* //p;q')
> break
> done
>
> And failing with 'env: cd: No such file or directory'
>
> $built_programs is returning:
>
> cd ..&& /bin/sh ./config
On 30/09/2011 00:44, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Matthew Burgess wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> For a while now, I've had 2 test failures in coreutils, but have just
>> ignored them. With the latest version I saw a 3rd failure, which made
>> me relook at Coreutils' test
Hi,
For a while now, I've had 2 test failures in coreutils, but have just
ignored them. With the latest version I saw a 3rd failure, which made
me relook at Coreutils' test suite. The failures I see are:
misc/help-version
misc/invalid-opt
rm/many-dir-entries-vs-OOM
The 1st 2 tests pass if I
On 27/09/2011 22:35, Ken Moffat wrote:
> With respect, Matt, it's the glib2 part that is bloat. I remember
> some discussion, but I forget why we did it
pkg-config upstream, as of 0.26, removed the internal Glib-1 that it
used to bundle, therefore forcing us to install a system-wide copy and
a
On 27/09/2011 20:24, Matthew Burgess wrote:
> On 27/09/2011 19:08, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>
>> Yes, we're getting bloat inserted by upstream:
>
> Looking at the ChangeLog, the root dependency is "Add Pkg-Config as it's
> a pre-requisite of E2fsprogs' new config
On 27/09/2011 19:08, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Yes, we're getting bloat inserted by upstream:
Looking at the ChangeLog, the root dependency is "Add Pkg-Config as it's
a pre-requisite of E2fsprogs' new configure switches." However, that
ChangeLog entry is within a whole bunch of Util-Linux changes,
On 27/09/2011 18:09, Andrew Benton wrote:
> It seems that glib-2.30.0 requires libffi and python.
Thanks for the heads up. I'm not actually that bothered by those 2
dependencies. libffi has no dependencies itself, and Python has no
mandatory dependencies, so it's only 2 packages that need to
On 16/09/2011 19:09, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Andrew Benton wrote:
>> On Thu, 15 Sep 2011 21:46:08 +0100
>> Matthew Burgess wrote:
>>
>>> So, based on the above, 5 is definitely something to look into I think.
>>>If that doesn't pan out, th
On 15/09/2011 20:38, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> There are options about what to do right now:
>
> 1. Leave in the warning message and optionally write something about it
> in the book.
We try, generally, to accomodate changes in upstream programs. I'll
defer to upstream's views on the fact that bl
On 15/09/2011 20:38, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> There are options about what to do right now:
>
> 1. Leave in the warning message and optionally write something about it
> in the book.
We try, generally, to accomodate changes in upstream programs. I'll
defer to upstream's views on the fact that bl
On 12/09/2011 00:23, Gerard Beekmans wrote:
> Speaking of mailing lists. I wasn't going to bring it up yet but I have
> toyed with the idea for several years now of moving away from the idea
> of email based mailing lists and moving to a forum based system. Before
> all us old timers (myself inclu
On 12/09/2011 00:21, Ken Moffat wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 12:09:15AM +0100, Ken Moffat wrote:
>> Maybe, moving to git instead of svn ? Git is a bitch to become
>> comfortable with [ I dropped out of clfs when they moved to it ] but
>> it does make branching easy. Perhaps that isn't an is
On 11/09/2011 19:40, Gerard Beekmans wrote:
>
> This period of time where we discuss migrations would be a good time for
> us to discuss any wholesome changes we might like to implement. We can
> start off with a new server and a clean slate instead of blindly
> replicating the current setup and m
On 12/09/2011 20:40, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Matt,
> I saw your conversation with Kay Sievers at
> http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.hotplug.devel/17011
>
> How do we want to address this? I'm not sure that the advice to ignore
> the clock setting and always use ntp is the best approach. It
On 09/09/2011 22:30, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> "git.kernel.org could not be found. Please check the name and try again."
Several kernel.org servers were compromised recently and have been taken
offline for investigation. The main website, ftp site and git repos are
certainly affected by this.
Rega
On 09/09/2011 19:11, Walter Webb wrote:
> I don't know if it's my own problem or a general one, but the directory
> /usr/include/rpc contains one file; netdb.h. /tools/include/rpc also has
> the one file. I discovered this when trying to install portmap in a
> completed system.
Yes, this has bee
On 03/09/2011 22:11, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
>> On Sep 3, 2011, at 12:58 PM, Matthew Burgess wrote:
>>> Confirmed here with popt-1.16. It seems odd that pkg-config
>>> bundles a version of popt known to be broken, and requires a
>>> confi
On 03/09/2011 16:52, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
>> You modify the expected return value of a test for pkg-config and in
>> doing so, I think you may be invalidating the test.
>
> Matt did that about 3 months ago.
Yeah, so I did...sometimes 'svn annotate' sucks :)
>> I have not ye
On Thu, 01 Sep 2011 23:59:40 -0500, DJ Lucas wrote:
> According to the home page, we should be applying the upstream patches
> found here:
> http://www.mpfr.org/mpfr-3.0.1/allpatches
>
> See bugs section at: http://www.mpfr.org/mpfr-3.0.1/
Thanks DJ, this is now ticket #2918.
Regards,
Matt.
-
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 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
On 18/08/2011 16:44, Dan Nicholson wrote:
> If you look at the links there, they are correctly ending before the
> trailing punctuation. However, in the generated mail (at least in the
> mailman archives), the punctuation has been included in the URL. One
> of the admins would have to hunt that do
On Fri, 12 Aug 2011 14:10:05 +0100, Andrew Benton wrote:
> The patch attached to that bug applies cleanly and fixes the problem,
> Firefox no longer crashes. As this is a bug in glibc-2.14 (glibc-2.13
> works fine and does not need patching) I think we should add this to
> the book or people will
On 05/08/2011 19:55, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> I've thought for a while that there should be a location that is
> accessible across boots that is always available (not a mountpoint).
> It's a catch-22 though. How do you mount / read only (for security) and
> still be able to write this persistent data
On 05/08/2011 19:55, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> I've thought for a while that there should be a location that is
> accessible across boots that is always available (not a mountpoint).
> It's a catch-22 though. How do you mount / read only (for security) and
> still be able to write this persistent data
On Fri, 5 Aug 2011 01:06:52 -0700, Nathan Coulson wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 12:12 AM, Matthew Burgess <
> matt...@linuxfromscratch.org> wrote:
>
>> On 05/08/2011 03:41, Bryan Kadzban wrote:
>> > Matthew Burgess wrote:
>> >> But that raises the ques
On 05/08/2011 03:41, Bryan Kadzban wrote:
> Matthew Burgess wrote:
>> But that raises the question of what that bootscript was trying to do
>> in the first place? So, it turns out that the actions specified by
>> 'RUN+=' udev rules can fail for any of a variety of
Hi all,
With the upgrade to Udev-173, we now see a warning that the call to
'udevadm trigger --type=failed --action=add' from S10udev is deprecated.
The thread starting at
http://www.spinics.net/lists/hotplug/msg05039.html goes into more detail
about the issues involved, but in effect, Udev'
Hi all,
With the upgrade to Udev-173, we now see a warning that the call to
'udevadm trigger --type=failed --action=add' from S10udev is deprecated.
The thread starting at
http://www.spinics.net/lists/hotplug/msg05039.html goes into more detail
about the issues involved, but in effect, Udev'
On 03/08/2011 18:20, Andrew Benton wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Aug 2011 9:19:40 -0600
> Matthew Burgess wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 2 Aug 2011 17:20:29 +0100, Andrew Benton wrote:
>>
>>> checking whether to use .ctors/.dtors header and trailer... configure:
>>> err
On 03/08/2011 18:20, Andrew Benton wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Aug 2011 9:19:40 -0600
> Matthew Burgess wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 2 Aug 2011 17:20:29 +0100, Andrew Benton wrote:
>>
>>> checking whether to use .ctors/.dtors header and trailer... configure:
>>> err
On Tue, 2 Aug 2011 17:20:29 +0100, Andrew Benton wrote:
> checking whether to use .ctors/.dtors header and trailer... configure:
> error: missing __attribute__ ((constructor)) support??
Looks like that was caused by this change (apologies if the link
wraps awkwardly!).
http://sourceware.org/git
On 03/08/2011 05:23, Lemon Lime wrote:
> Hello list,
>
> I have just installed systemd on my LFS-based system, and I would like
> to share my experience. Is there anyone here who is interested in
> installation instructions, boot time measurements, configuration options
> and other information on t
On 02/08/2011 22:16, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> I could ask that the util-linux guys omit /run also.
>
> Alternatively, we could do something like:
>
> [ -d /run/var ] || return
>
> in the appropriate places in functions so the attempt to write is
> skipped if the /run/var directory is missing.
>
>
On 02/08/2011 21:07, xinglp wrote:
> 2011/8/2 Bruce Dubbs:
>> I have made a very large, invasive change to LFS. All the bootscripts
>> have been rewritten.
>>
>> From the change log:
>>
>> [bdubbs] - Rewrite bootscripts and Chaper 7.
>> o Make scripts compatible with initd format (see BLFS).
>>
1 - 100 of 1170 matches
Mail list logo
