On Mon, Nov 14, 2005 at 01:30:30PM -0500, Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
> Hey Everyone,
>
> Wanted an opinion. In the spirit of verbosity, I was wondering if anyone
> would find this change useful. In the chapter 5 Adjusting the Toolchain
> section:
>
> find ${GCC_INCLUDEDIR}/* -maxdepth 0 -xtype d -
On 10/6/05, Dan Nicholson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Just finished all 3. Here was my experience. Hardware is PIII with
Did you try using the 3 (e.g. to build something else) or just run the
tests? I'm sure the tests are helpful but I would be reluctant to
spend time building them all if I did
Quadrata! You gotta email me from a non-lfs address (unless you're
gonna keep this one, which I doubt) so maybe if I'm up in yonkers
(*cough* I mean the bronx) we can get a beer or somethin :)
Mike
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
U
On 8/17/05, Matthew Burgess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Basically it's because, purely through habit, I only ever use backticks.
> Unfortunately, one can't nest backticks, so I came up with the mixture
> of backticks and $(). Oh, plus the fact that in my makefile based
> scripts the '$' needs e
On 8/16/05, Matthew Burgess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Matthew Burgess wrote:
>
> > # echo `dirname $(gcc -print-file-name=libgcc.a)`/specs
>
> That can actually be shortened down to:
>
> SPECFILE=`dirname $(gcc -print-libgcc-file-name)`/specs
>
This stuff is all over my head but I'm just won
On 8/13/05, Randy McMurchy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Chris Staub wrote these words on 08/12/05 23:20 CST:
> > The installation instructions for Texinfo give an "optional" step for a
> > "TeX" installation, but it doesn't say why you would need it or what
> > programs might require it. Some kind
Archaic just recently said:
> Each virtual system has full root privs
> and can even reboot the system without affecting any of the other
> systems. I forget the name of the program that allows this. Something
> like jailed or jaild or what not. I cannot remember any details, but it
> might worth
On 6/30/05, Matthew Burgess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sorry for the crap state of affairs our lists recently, I'll try and get
> my head around postfix/SA configuration when I have some time. In the
> mean time, if anyone spots any spam on the lists and can provide a
> step-by-step guide/shell
Not sure this is lfs-dev material, but irc.linuxfromscratch.org seems
to be down...
Just thought I'd mention it... ok I'm lying, actually I'm addicted to
irc and I'm going through withdrawal. ;)
Mike
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/fa
On 4/26/05, Jeremy Huntwork <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Just wanted to clarify something. In the current cross-lfs book that is
> under development, as well as some of the threads in discussing the
> cross-lfs book, we've been using the term 'Reboot' when talking about
> that point in
On Apr 2, 2005 4:23 PM, DECHAMPS Benoît <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You probably are using a 2.6.11.x kernel. You must use a 2.6.10 kernel or
> older to get the glibc make check successfull.
> --
That is indeed the case... the system did seem to build fine even
though the check failed. I'm about
I tried building testing on my P4 desktop and got a failure during
glibc's make check in chapter 5:
make[2]: *** [/mnt/lfs/tools/build/glibc-build/nptl/tst-cancelx17.out] Error 1
make[2]: Leaving directory `/mnt/lfs/tools/build/glibc-2.3.4/nptl'
make[1]: *** [nptl/tests] Error 2
make[1]: Leaving d
12 matches
Mail list logo
