On Mon, Apr 01, 2013 at 06:49:25PM +0100, Ken Moffat wrote:
> I'd seen comments on the kernel list about bc being required in
> 3.9, and then forgotten about them (on my desktops I have it anyway,
> for xscreensaver). It gets used for kernel/timeconst.h
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/214361
On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 5:50 PM, Rob Landley wrote:
> Just a random note, but I've been building LFS systems using busybox as
> the base system for years now. (I spent several years making that work.
> :)
At risk of taking this even further off-topic ...
Have any of the LFS developers looked at m
On 04/01/2013 04:59:50 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> I don't mind adding it to LFS. It's one of the first things I build
> because I use it in my scripts for measuring build size.
>
> An additional package to move from LFS might be lsb_release-1.4 to
> complement what we have in Section 9.1.
And I ha
On 04/01/2013 04:59:50 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Ken Moffat wrote:
> > I'd seen comments on the kernel list about bc being required in
> > 3.9, and then forgotten about them (on my desktops I have it anyway,
> > for xscreensaver). It gets used for kernel/timeconst.h
> > https://patchwork.kernel.o
Ken Moffat wrote:
> I'd seen comments on the kernel list about bc being required in
> 3.9, and then forgotten about them (on my desktops I have it anyway,
> for xscreensaver). It gets used for kernel/timeconst.h
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/2143611/
>
> Now I'm just doing a fresh 7.3 i
