2013/3/22 :
>
>
> - Mail original -
>> De: "cybertao"
>> À: "LFS Developers Mailinglist"
>> Envoyé: Mercredi 20 Mars 2013 22:45:24
>> Objet: Re: [lfs-dev] LFS 7.3 ISO discussion
>>
>>
>>
>> So, what's u
- Mail original -
> De: "cybertao"
> À: "LFS Developers Mailinglist"
> Envoyé: Mercredi 20 Mars 2013 22:45:24
> Objet: Re: [lfs-dev] LFS 7.3 ISO discussion
>
>
>
> So, what's up with the linux kernel and overlayed filesystems?
>
William Tracy wrote:
> Aw, man, I built a "shrink LFS" script at one point but I think I
> don't have it any more.
>
> The big thing to know is that deleting files will not decrease the
> size of a Qemu image file.
Yes, I knew that.
> To get rid of the cruft created by building
> an LFS system, y
Aw, man, I built a "shrink LFS" script at one point but I think I
don't have it any more.
The big thing to know is that deleting files will not decrease the
size of a Qemu image file. To get rid of the cruft created by building
an LFS system, you might have to create a new Qemu disk image and "cp
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> I'm not sure about specific drivers, but I did get it working. I did
> 'make defconfig' and that seems to have done it. I've looked at the
> difference between configs for the one that sets up hda and the one that
> uses sda, but nothing jumps out at me.
> I'm going to pla
On Mar 20, 2013, at 8:31 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
No, it's not set, but you wouldn't want to run a virtual system from a
livecd anyway. The client OS shouldn't need it.
Oh I see now, the option someone was mentioning was virtio.
Perhaps that is the issue.
Sincerely,
William Harrington--
ht
William Harrington wrote:
>
> On Mar 20, 2013, at 8:13 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>
>> CONFIG_VIRTUALIZATION=y
>
> I think this is what the user was telling me about and I didn't have it
> in the livecd's kernel config. I can fix it if this is the case.
No, it's not set, but you wouldn't want to run
On Mar 20, 2013, at 8:13 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
CONFIG_VIRTUALIZATION=y
I think this is what the user was telling me about and I didn't have
it in the livecd's kernel config. I can fix it if this is the case.
Sincerely,
William Harrington--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/
William Harrington wrote:
>
> On Mar 20, 2013, at 5:00 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>
>> The same system that boots your livecd to
>> sda only recognizes hda with my kernel. It works, but I'd prefer sda
>
> I had a user talk to me about that specific problem. Something about
> needing some drivers in th
On Mar 20, 2013, at 5:00 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
The same system that boots your livecd to
sda only recognizes hda with my kernel. It works, but I'd prefer sda
I had a user talk to me about that specific problem. Something about
needing some drivers in the kernel for virtualization maybe? I
On Mar 20, 2013, at 4:45 PM, cybertao wrote:
So, what's up with the linux kernel and overlayed filesystems?
There's no support.
I notice the Arch CD initramfs creates RAM disks for volatile
directories and copy the contents into from archives into them.
That's no where near as elegant or
William Harrington wrote:
>
> On Mar 19, 2013, at 8:13 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>
>> The issues I had are the same for any iso. I can't add a user
>> (typically lfs) and have it stay. It needs that at every boot. The
>> same goes for creating /mnt/lfs. Starting sshd creates new keys and
>> requir
So, what's up with the linux kernel and overlayed filesystems? There's no
support.
I notice the Arch CD initramfs creates RAM disks for volatile directories
and copy the contents into from archives into them. That's no where near
as elegant or flexible.
On 21 March 2013 10:20, cybertao wrote:
On 21 March 2013 10:01, William Harrington wrote:
As far as it recreating ssh keys, I don't think you'd want to publish a
> livecd and distribute it and then everyone on the planet using the same ssh
> key if they have it open to the public vie their network connection. I
> don't know if that wou
On Mar 20, 2013, at 4:01 PM, William Harrington wrote:
building current and upcoming livecd's.
Er, LFS releases.
Sincerely,
William Harrington--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
On Mar 19, 2013, at 8:13 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
The issues I had are the same for any iso. I can't add a user
(typically lfs) and have it stay. It needs that at every boot. The
same goes for creating /mnt/lfs. Starting sshd creates new keys and
requires a little extra work when connecting f
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 09:28:25PM +0800, xinglp wrote:
> I have create a "live usb" system.
>
> Dowload here:
> http://sf.net/projects/smartutils/files/lfs_linux/2013-03-19-3.8.3-x86_64.live-image.raw.bz2
>
> Uncompress it, use 'dd' to write it to a flash drive(256MB+ size), use
> /dev/sdX not /
Continuing with the ISO discussion, I wanted to document my experiences.
First, I used the lfslivecd-x86_64-6.3-r2160-updated-nosrc.iso to start.
It booted without problem with qemu-1.40. I used:
ARGS="-enable-kvm -hda lfs73.img"
CDROM="-cdrom lfslivecd-x86_64-6.3-r2160-updated-nosrc.iso -boo
cybertao wrote:
> On 18 March 2013 14:08, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>
>> I agree, but at least that is a good baseline that checks the host
>> requirements that are currently published.
>
> Focusing on the more modern, I hadn't considered that priority for the
> development of the book. The Host System
On 18 March 2013 14:08, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> I agree, but at least that is a good baseline that checks the host
> requirements that are currently published.
Focusing on the more modern, I hadn't considered that priority for the
development of the book. The Host System Requirements and version
William Harrington wrote:
>
> On Mar 17, 2013, at 5:15 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>
>> Minimum ISO
>> Grep-2.5.1a 2.5.1 (not sure if that is really 2.5.1a or not)
>
> Packages built for the livecd are from LFS 6.3 and BLFS 6.3 which used
> grep 2.5.1a.
> Since 7.1, all I did was update programs
On Mar 17, 2013, at 5:15 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Minimum ISO
Grep-2.5.1a 2.5.1 (not sure if that is really 2.5.1a or not)
Packages built for the livecd are from LFS 6.3 and BLFS 6.3 which used
grep 2.5.1a.
Since 7.1, all I did was update programs to meet or exceed the host
system r
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Starting a new thread since the original subject was not about an ISO.
>
> William Harrington wrote:
>
> > I have been updating the 6.3 livecd for 7.x releases. It can also be
> > used to build previous releases.
> >
> > I spent the afternoon and evening updating and testi
William Harrington wrote:
>
> On Mar 17, 2013, at 1:18 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>
>> We need to get that on a different server that has better download
>> speed. I'm getting it now and it's a 30 minute process at about 200-300
>> KB/s. Downloads from anduin are at 1 MB/s.
>
> Not sure what your con
On Mar 17, 2013, at 1:18 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
We need to get that on a different server that has better download
speed. I'm getting it now and it's a 30 minute process at about
200-300
KB/s. Downloads from anduin are at 1 MB/s.
Not sure what your connection was like, but I get it betwe
Starting a new thread since the original subject was not about an ISO.
William Harrington wrote:
> I have been updating the 6.3 livecd for 7.x releases. It can also be
> used to build previous releases.
>
> I spent the afternoon and evening updating and testing the current
> updated livecd
I'd be interested to take a look at your work.
I've been taking my time as a lot of it is pretty new to me. There is no
escaping the fact an initrd file is needed, for the bootup on multiple
systems by taking advantage of modules, and to mount a root from CD that
can be overlaid with a ram disk.
On Mar 16, 2013, at 9:32 PM, William Harrington wrote:
the 7.2 LFS ppc
er 6.2 LFS ppc
Sincerely,
WIlliam Harrington--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
On Mar 13, 2013, at 11:40 AM, lfs-
dev.neophyte_...@ordinaryamerican.net wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 11:39 PM, cybertao - psyber...@gmail.com
> wrote:
>> I elected to use 'Os' optimisations on my current compilation
>> round. I
>> understand it to be safe option and can only assume it
lfs-dev.neophyte_...@ordinaryamerican.net wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 11:39 PM, cybertao - psyber...@gmail.com wrote:
>> I elected to use 'Os' optimisations on my current compilation round. I
>> understand it to be safe option and can only assume it help when it comes to
>> compressing the fi
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 11:39 PM, cybertao - psyber...@gmail.com wrote:
> I elected to use 'Os' optimisations on my current compilation round. I
> understand it to be safe option and can only assume it help when it comes to
> compressing the filesystem into an archive on a limited media choice. B
cybertao wrote:
> Okay, I'm on the job.
Excellent.
Since I've been playing with the systemd branch I
> need to compile vanilla 32-bit and 64-bit releases, which I'm currently
> doing using jhalfs.
> I just realised I chose the development branch without much consideration,
> when the stable ve
- Mail original -
> De: "cybertao"
> À: "LFS Developers Mailinglist"
> Envoyé: Mercredi 13 Mars 2013 07:39:25
> Objet: Re: [lfs-dev] LFS 7.3: ISO discussion
>
>
> I elected to use 'Os' optimisations on my current compilation roun
I elected to use 'Os' optimisations on my current compilation round. I
understand it to be safe option and can only assume it help when it comes
to compressing the filesystem into an archive on a limited media choice.
But I am no expert on the subject and would appreciate suggestions.
--
http://
> Either one would be great, though I think a 7.3 stable ISO would be
> perfect.
> If a dual i686 and x86_64 is doable, then great, otherwise two ISOs for the
> two platforms shouldn't be that much harder then the combo. At least it
> seems that way to me.
Looking at how Arch do it, it shouldn't
cybertao wrote these words on 03/12/13 22:24 CST:
> I just realised I chose the development branch without much consideration,
> when the stable version my be more appropriate. If only for the
> convenience of release cycle guidelines. I focus on making a bootable CD
> and USB image for now using
Okay, I'm on the job. Since I've been playing with the systemd branch I
need to compile vanilla 32-bit and 64-bit releases, which I'm currently
doing using jhalfs.
I just realised I chose the development branch without much consideration,
when the stable version my be more appropriate. If only fo
cybertao wrote:
> I'm interested. I'd definitely need the help and guidance, but have the
> time and enthusiasm.
> The previous Live CD was an invaluable tool to me over the years, not just
> as a platform for building LFS. Arch has replaced my need for it, but a
> Live CD primed and ready to go
38 matches
Mail list logo
