On 10/26/10, Drew Ames wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 10/26/2010 01:26 AM, DJ Lucas wrote:
>>
>>> That patch is now also available, in LFS format, from
>>>
> http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/patches/downloads/glibc/glibc-2.12.1-origin_fix-1.patch.
>>>
>>> Apply usin
On 10/26/10, Michael Schmidt wrote:
> Hi everybody!
>
>
> I was wondering: one of the things that gives me a headache when installing
> LFS, is that there is no generic package management system that you can use
> to install the basic system software (Chapter 6). I know, that the point of
> lfs is
On 10/7/10, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> For some reason I can't figure out, Drew Ames' post is being marked as
> spam when it isn't. This is his post:
> -
Hmmm, well you posted it without it being spam.
One silly thought:
Diff the spam post with this post and the only difference
On 9/2/10, Drew Ames wrote:
> # Finally, enter the chroot environment:
> chroot "$LFS" /tools/bin/env -i \
> HOME=/root TERM="$TERM" PS1='\u:\w\$ ' \
> PATH=/bin:/usr/bin:/sbin:/usr/sbin:/tools/bin \
> /tools/bin/bash --login +h
>
I would read "6.62. Cleaning Up" regarding the chroot
On 8/2/10, Ken Moffat wrote:
before uninstalling in case I change my mind.
>
> Cool. You've obviously been bitten in the past. Based on my script
> that runs through my audio, video, and photo files every week to
> check if md5s exist, and generate them where they don't, I imagine
> this will
DJ Lucas wrote:
>
> Berkeley DB could be done easily enough I think.
Flat text files allow processing via command line tools such as grep,
sed, awk, perl, bash, etcetera. Does a DB require an esoteric API that
can get in someone's way?
>
> if everything were properly accounted for,
> prior to ins
FYI
A possible search usefulness:
Or, other search methods to deduce the root filesystem for the
kernel's "root=" parameter, or where the kernel is.
* Suppose that the grub directory is a subdirectory of boot
* Suppose that the boot directory is a subdirectory of root /
* Suppose that the kernel
On 7/2/10, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>> ./configure --bla-bla-bla
>> make
>
> Try to do a simple ls in the grub top level directory after a build if
> you don't use a separate build directory. There are 2400 files, many of
Not saying that is the right way. Just that it succeeded and I didn't
see or un
FYI
-
For grub-1.98 !!!
-
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1195275
describes a way to save the last chosen boot option to default
Involved is /etc/default/grub file which must be user created:
==
cat > /etc/defau
On 7/1/10, Sebastian Plotz wrote:
> If the LFS-User has moved the /boot partition (NOT / partition), the
> system will still boot (with help of the search line).
>
My understanding (from experimentation and documentation) is that the
UUID is specifically generated for a specific file system. You
On 7/1/10, linux fan wrote:
> something about how the esoteric grub2 works to be meaningful. Anyone
> is welcome to disagree.
>
An alternative language might be that:
The search line is not required on a typical LFS system.
It could optionally be noted that there is an alternative t
On 7/1/10, Andrew Benton wrote:
> Why would we say that? You've not shown any meaningful use for the
> search lines on an LFS system.
Rather than stating "The search lines are not meaningful ...",
this exercise has revealed that the next 2 lines are equivalent in their effect:
search --no-flop
On 6/30/10, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>
> I'll ask the question again. How is search useful in an LFS environment
> where we don't have initrd available?
>
By using search, one can entirely avoid using the grub drive and
partition notation. e.g., (hd0,1)
I alone find that potentially useful.
--
htt
On 7/1/10, splotz90 wrote:
> Ok, so we say "The search lines are only meaningful for LFS systems if a
> separate boot partition is used." ?
A separate boot partition is not a necessity for using search. I works
for me with boot as a subdirectory on the root / partition.
I don't know how general
On 6/30/10, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> This is a catch-22. udev populates /dev which is needed to determine
> partitions. The only alternative is to do raw device searches and the
> number of different device types and filesystems on those devices makes
> this really prohibitive. GRUB does it, but t
On 6/30/10, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>
> The Linux kernel generally needs to be told what it's root partition is.
> To the best of my knowledge, it understands root=/dev/ and
> root=LABEL=label-name.
I so wished that to be true that I grasped at straws, but kernel won't
understand
root=LABEL=label-nam
On 6/30/10, Stuart Stegall wrote:
> ro is also unnecessary since around 2.2.x (I don't swear to that, it
> could have been 2.1.x or 0.99.) The kernel is read-only by default.
Confirmed.
I requested a forced fsck by placing empty file with touch /forcefsck
I booted as previously with no "ro" pa
On 6/30/10, Sebastian Plotz wrote:
> "The search lines are only meaningful for LFS systems if a separate boot
> partition and a LABEL or UUID entry for this partition in /etc/fstab is
> used."
>
It booted me and mounted /dev/sdd10
With this in grub.cfg
=
menuentry "GNU/Linu
On 6/30/10, Andrew Benton wrote:
>
> But it won't boot very far. The kernel won't be able to mount its root
> partition unless you manually edit the grub.cfg or compile the kernel
> with an initramfs
>
It needs to be tested if it will boot based on the search line when the
linux line omits the "r
On 5/25/10, Bryan Kadzban wrote:
>
[snip]
>> Until such time as a package that an LFS system requires cannot
>> itself function without parsing XML, then there's seemingly no need
>> for utiliites that handle XML to be in the LFS system.
>
[snip]
> to suppress the failure ourselves, let's do it, a
On 5/15/10, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> I added a new image to the lfs home page.
>
> http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/
>
I don't know why, but the critter on the left really bothers me.
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See th
On 5/13/10, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Curious. My next step will be to go back and rebuild everything.
>
Could there be a difference in gcc-4.5 with respect to which glibc was
in service at the time it was built that contibutes to "it works for
them and not for you"?
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/
Looks like Kernel 2.6.32.9 is with fix fo BUG at fs/ext3/super.c
in kernel/futex.c that glibc's test suite was known to trigger.
http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=126428261230399&w=2
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See
On 2/19/10, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> My first choice right now is the script with the unconditional -x as a
> second choice.
It seems script effectively does unconditional -x because
it greps for Version_ which is what they removed
which triggered this whole business.
Does -x cause loss of informati
On 2/18/10, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> I saw that when I was researching last night. I don't think it is a
> feature. It implies something is wrong. When something is right in
> Linux/Unix, the application should stay silent.
I fussed a lot over this and the warning happen in ksym.c in sysklogd sour
reply to an email:
On Sat, 7 Nov 2009, linux fan wrote:
>
> "[PATCH] init/version.c: Define version_string only if"
> causes sysklogd to report "Cannot find map"
But isn't that what we _want_.
If we have CONFIG_KALLSYMS, then we do _not_ want sysklogd to try to
On 12/23/09, ALIP BUDIANTO wrote:
> The LFS team may just install wget without the deps but also tell a
I didn't think wget or even ftp would work before getting internet
connection, which for me, requires installing dhcpcd.
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.
On 11/19/09, Matthew Burgess wrote:
> The book switched over to using the .tar.bz2 file. Could you check the
> md5sum matches that please?
OK that matches.
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information pa
On 11/19/09, Uwe Düffert wrote:
> try ftp://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/patch/patch-2.6.tar.gz
OK
With that, I got a different md5sum than
5729b1430ba6c2216e0f3eb18f213c81 in the book.
md5sum patch-2.6.tar.gz
bc71d33c35004db3768465bcaf9ed23c patch-2.6.tar.gz
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listi
lfs trunk on 2009 11 19
Under All Packages,
patch-2.6.tar.gz has gone missing
wget -c ftp://alpha.gnu.org/gnu/diffutils/patch-2.6.tar.gz
--14:45:10-- ftp://alpha.gnu.org/gnu/diffutils/patch-2.6.tar.gz
=> `patch-2.6.tar.gz'
Resolving alpha.gnu.org... 140.186.70.21
Connecting to alpha.g
30 matches
Mail list logo
