Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Andrew Benton wrote:
>> On Mon, 27 Feb 2012 11:43:11 -0600
>> Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>>
>>> I'm going to remove it from my working copy of the book and make a
>>> test run to see if not having it runs into any problems.
>>>
>>> I do want to leave it in for 7.1 just because its a
Andrew Benton wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Feb 2012 11:43:11 -0600
> Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>
>> I'm going to remove it from my working copy of the book and make a test
>> run to see if not having it runs into any problems.
>>
>> I do want to leave it in for 7.1 just because its a minor issue and we
>> don'
On Mon, 27 Feb 2012 11:43:11 -0600
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> I'm going to remove it from my working copy of the book and make a test
> run to see if not having it runs into any problems.
>
> I do want to leave it in for 7.1 just because its a minor issue and we
> don't have enough time to test it t
- Original Message -
From: "Bruce Dubbs"
To: "LFS Developers Mailinglist"
Sent: Monday, February 27, 2012 6:43 PM
Subject: Re: [lfs-dev] Util-linux arch command
> Matt Burgess wrote:
> > On Mon, 2012-02-27 at 08:33 +0100, Gilles Espinasse wrote:
> >
Matt Burgess wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-02-27 at 08:33 +0100, Gilles Espinasse wrote:
>
>> Each configure run arch at 2 different path and look to satisfy from
>> 'unknow' answer
>> /bin/arch = `(/bin/arch) 2>/dev/null || echo
>> unknown`
>> /usr/bin/arch -k = `(/usr/bin
On 2012-02-27 07:41, Matt Burgess wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-02-27 at 08:33 +0100, Gilles Espinasse wrote:
>
>> Each configure run arch at 2 different path and look to satisfy from
>> 'unknow' answer
>> /bin/arch = `(/bin/arch) 2>/dev/null ||
>> echo
>> unknown`
>> /usr/bin/ar
On Mon, 2012-02-27 at 08:33 +0100, Gilles Espinasse wrote:
> Each configure run arch at 2 different path and look to satisfy from
> 'unknow' answer
> /bin/arch = `(/bin/arch) 2>/dev/null || echo
> unknown`
> /usr/bin/arch -k = `(/usr/bin/arch -k) 2>/dev/null |
- Original Message -
From: "Bruce Dubbs"
To: "LFS Developers Mailinglist"
Sent: Monday, February 27, 2012 5:50 AM
Subject: Re: [lfs-dev] Util-linux arch command
> > ◦[randy] - Added three configure parameters to the Chapter 6
> > Util-linux-ng
On Sun, 2012-02-26 at 22:50 -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Perhaps we should just drop it since neither util-linux nor coreutils
> builds it normally and it probably could be replaced with an alias or
> script that just does `uname -m`.
I'd be happy to see the Util-Linux version dropped. I'm not
Steve Crosby wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 5:14 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>> I was looking at the instructions for util-linux and notice that we use
>> --enable-arch. Does anyone remember why? When I 'man arch', it says
>> "arch is a deprecated command since util-linux 2.13. Use uname -m or
Added in 6,4 as follows - but no idea why - perhaps the mailing lists
in this date range will have a clue
•2008-10-11
◦[randy] - Added three configure parameters to the Chapter 6
Util-linux-ng instructions so that additional programs are installed.
Also updated the installed programs list.
On M
I was looking at the instructions for util-linux and notice that we use
--enable-arch. Does anyone remember why? When I 'man arch', it says
"arch is a deprecated command since util-linux 2.13. Use uname -m or
use arch from the GNU coreutils package."
I did check coreutils and --enable-ins
12 matches
Mail list logo
