Jim Gifford wrote:
There was also to be a hold on udev util that was worked out also.
That's not the way I saw things Jim, apologies if I've misunderstood
something. To me, things got delayed simply because the move to a
single rules file caused folks to think "why are we setting policy in
the
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Matthew Burgess wrote:
Andrew Fyfe wrote:
Greg Schafer (http://www.diy-linux.org/x86-reference-build/) has been
building pass 1 of binutils and gcc dynamically for a while without
any problems.
Thanks. Shockingly, I actually read the book for once, to see what it
had to say
Matthew Burgess wrote:
That's not the way I saw things Jim, apologies if I've misunderstood
something. To me, things got delayed simply because the move to a
single rules file caused folks to think "why are we setting policy in
the book". The way I saw things was that we could do a simple merg
Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
But why does LFS-SVN need to wait on BLFS? BLFS is not based on LFS-SVN,
it's based on LFS-6.0.
Exactly, so if we go and remove all those users and groups that we don't
think are required/desired on a base LFS system then it'll cause pain
for those then installing package
Matthew Burgess wrote:
OK guys, I want to get this one out of the way a.s.a.p.
And it's now fixed as of r4741, or at least I think it is!
Regards,
Matt.
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Matthew Burgess wrote:
Jim Gifford wrote:
There was also to be a hold on udev util that was worked out also.
That's not the way I saw things Jim, apologies if I've misunderstood
something. To me, things got delayed simply because the move to a
single rules file caused folks to think "why are we
Matthew Burgess wrote:
Exactly, so if we go and remove all those users and groups that we don't
think are required/desired on a base LFS system then it'll cause pain
for those then installing packages from BLFS that require those
users/groups to be present. Admittedly, the pain is minimal (a
'
Jim Gifford wrote:
Which I had that ready and was told to hold off.I had the updates rules
posted on my website for a long time and submitted them into the bug
report.
Which I only saw *after* I'd applied the change and was closing the bug :(
When I asked to apply them I was told to hold on.
I'm
Matthew Burgess wrote:
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Don't get me wrong, I don't mind Gerard doing a release ( :) ) if that's
what is felt is the best approach. I just wonder if it's worth basing
the release off of 6.0 (i.e. no package upgrades, etc.) or if we branch
from trunk/ and freeze for release on
Matthew Burgess wrote:
Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
But why does LFS-SVN need to wait on BLFS? BLFS is not based on
LFS-SVN, it's based on LFS-6.0.
Exactly, so if we go and remove all those users and groups that we
don't think are required/desired on a base LFS system then it'll cause
pain for those
Matthew Burgess wrote:
Matthew Burgess wrote:
OK guys, I want to get this one out of the way a.s.a.p.
And it's now fixed as of r4741, or at least I think it is!
You might want to revisit section 4.5 and change the dicussion to
"Standard Build Unit" :)
On the same page, you might also want to remov
Randy McMurchy wrote:
Hi all,
In the Chapter 6 instructions to build GCC, it says this:
"The full GCC package contains additional compilers. Instructions
for building these can be found at
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/svn/general/gcc.html.";
This is true enough. However, it's misleadin
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
You might want to revisit section 4.5 and change the dicussion to
"Standard Build Unit" :)
Thanks Bruce. I made the suggested changes apart from the link to the
SBU page. Once the pages are in the website repo I'll update the link.
I'll probably get to it some time next we
-- Forwarded Message --
Subject: [ANNOUNCE] linux-libc-headers 2.6.11.0
Date: Sunday 13 Mar 2005 22:29
From: Mariusz Mazur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Available at http://ep09.pld-linux.org/~mmazur/linux-libc-headers/
Changes:
- updated to 2.6.11 (adde
14 matches
Mail list logo
