On 1/27/06, Ken Moffat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I haven't been running the testsuites, but I'm doing that now to make
> > sure that their dependencies are met.
>
> Good man! As has already been seen with perl and db, and I think a
> locale for coreutils tests, ICA analysis is different f
On 1/27/06, Ken Moffat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I guess clfs doesn't have this problem because it is using a newer
> snapshot of glibc. Does that seem reasonable ?
Greg once posted a reference to an upstream bug report. But I don't
know whether it is fixed or not. One way to find out is b
On Fri, 27 Jan 2006, Ken Moffat wrote:
On Fri, 27 Jan 2006, Tushar Teredesai wrote:
Maybe one of the package does this. Try this to verify that it is
indeed a problem with ldconfig.
Compile readline as follows:
./configure --prefix=/tmp/readline
make
make install
make install
ls -l /tmp/read
Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
Matthew Burgess wrote:
1) Have the two toolchain bugs (1675 and 1677 - note that 1675's title
isn't entirely accurate!) fixed in LFS trunk. I'd need to re-read the
discussions on those two to figure out quite what's wrong and how to fix
them, or someone else could just
On Fri, 27 Jan 2006, Tushar Teredesai wrote:
Maybe one of the package does this. Try this to verify that it is
indeed a problem with ldconfig.
Compile readline as follows:
./configure --prefix=/tmp/readline
make
make install
make install
ls -l /tmp/readline/lib
ldconfig -n /tmp/readline/lib
ls
On 1/27/06, Ken Moffat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My script makes no explicit calls to ldconfig.
>
>
Maybe one of the package does this. Try this to verify that it is
indeed a problem with ldconfig.
Compile readline as follows:
./configure --prefix=/tmp/readline
make
make install
make install
On Fri, 27 Jan 2006, Tushar Teredesai wrote:
On 1/27/06, Ken Moffat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On the non-alphabetic book, with utf8, I never managed to track down
why updating readline in place was leaving the symlinks pointing to
.old. FWIW clfs (ppc) was ok for that, so it must have been
On 1/27/06, Ken Moffat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On the non-alphabetic book, with utf8, I never managed to track down
> why updating readline in place was leaving the symlinks pointing to
> .old. FWIW clfs (ppc) was ok for that, so it must have been a problem
> specific to the non-alphabeti
Long ago, On Tue, 24 Jan 2006, Dan Nicholson wrote:
Hi again,
Here's some results from my ICA/Farce run of yesterday. They show
that the system will rebuild itself with the exception of a couple
things that probably won't be fixed by me. (stdc++ .la and gch
differences) These exist whether
Matthew Burgess wrote:
> 1) Have the two toolchain bugs (1675 and 1677 - note that 1675's title
> isn't entirely accurate!) fixed in LFS trunk. I'd need to re-read the
> discussions on those two to figure out quite what's wrong and how to fix
> them, or someone else could just post patches and I'
On 1/25/06, Greg Schafer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dan Nicholson wrote:
>
> > Unfortunately, the *startfile_prefix_spec doesn't work (at least for
> > me) on gcc-4.0.2.
>
> How did you test it? I found during my initial research that this spec
> doesn't work when placed into an external file
Gu
On 1/25/06, Matthew Burgess
>
> What I'd like to do now is:
>
> 1) Have the two toolchain bugs (1675 and 1677 - note that 1675's title
> isn't entirely accurate!) fixed in LFS trunk. I'd need to re-read the
> discussions on those two to figure out quite what's wrong and how to fix
> them, or someo
Dan Nicholson wrote:
> Unfortunately, the *startfile_prefix_spec doesn't work (at least for
> me) on gcc-4.0.2.
How did you test it? I found during my initial research that this spec
doesn't work when placed into an external file and called with eg:
-specs=/tmp/specs. However, it did work when th
On 1/25/06, Greg Schafer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Matthew Burgess wrote:
>
> > 1) Have the two toolchain bugs (1675 and 1677 - note that 1675's title
> > isn't entirely accurate!) fixed in LFS trunk. I'd need to re-read the
> > discussions on those two to figure out quite what's wrong and how
Matthew Burgess wrote:
> 1) Have the two toolchain bugs (1675 and 1677 - note that 1675's title
> isn't entirely accurate!) fixed in LFS trunk. I'd need to re-read the
> discussions on those two to figure out quite what's wrong and how to fix
> them, or someone else could just post patches and
Dan Nicholson wrote:
Hi again,
Here's some results from my ICA/Farce run of yesterday. They show
that the system will rebuild itself with the exception of a couple
things that probably won't be fixed by me. (stdc++ .la and gch
differences) These exist whether I use the LFS or DIY toolchain.
On Wed, Jan 25, 2006 at 07:24:13AM -0800, Dan Nicholson wrote:
> > Also, as Greg once mentioned, I'm a little interested in putting
> > ICA/farce support usage into jhalfs. That too, might make the work a bit
> > easier. If you feel like helping with that as well... ;)
>
> I'd be glad to contribut
On 1/24/06, Jeremy Huntwork <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Well, if you could spell out your steps exactly when doing an ICA (or
> point me to the thread if you've said before and I missed it) that might
> help - more might offer to start running the comparisons.
Fortunately, I have an unpacked se
Dan Nicholson wrote:
> Also, I might be a little worn out on ICA to do this, but we've only
> determined the true dependencies for about half the packages in Ch. 6.
> I was thinking that I might reverse the order to see what happens
> with the packages at the end of the alphabet (texinfo, util-lin
On 1/24/06, Jeremy Huntwork <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> After that, we need to
> start getting the actual dependency list in, and the reasons for the
> build order.
I've been thinking about that. I really don't know a good way to do
it. I think Chris has the best notes on this. The order was
Dan Nicholson wrote:
> Hopefully, the changes will be added to the alphabetical book in
> http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~jhuntwork/lfs-alphabetical/
>
> The build instructions are current up to the LFS SVN-20060117 book.
>
> I haven't been running the testsuites, but I'm doing that now to make
Hi again,
Here's some results from my ICA/Farce run of yesterday. They show
that the system will rebuild itself with the exception of a couple
things that probably won't be fixed by me. (stdc++ .la and gch
differences) These exist whether I use the LFS or DIY toolchain.
http://staff.washingto
22 matches
Mail list logo
