DJ Lucas wrote:
Don't do that. Do it from the toplevel. There is one instance in
linux/errno.h for asm-generic/errno.h.
okay..scratch that completely...
Kill asm-generic with this snipit:
## Flatten asm-generic headers
# first unifdef all the _ASM_GERNERIC_*_H #ifndef's
cd asm-generic
fo
Jürg Billeter wrote:
Yes, as I've written before, iproute2 is one of the problematic
packages. Besides fixing the includes[1] you need to remove the local
copy of the not sanitized kernel headers, i.e. rm -r include/linux[2]
Jürg
[1]
http://www.paldo.org/paldo/sources/iproute2/iproute2-2.6.15
On Son, 2006-03-19 at 12:28 -0600, DJ Lucas wrote:
> Jürg Billeter wrote:
> >
> > Yes, as I've written before, iproute2 is one of the problematic
> > packages. Besides fixing the includes[1] you need to remove the local
> > copy of the not sanitized kernel headers, i.e. rm -r include/linux[2]
> I
Jürg Billeter wrote:
On Son, 2006-03-19 at 12:28 -0600, DJ Lucas wrote:
I'm using with the compat headers (modified from Jurg's version of the
script) and glibc-2.3.6. Did not use Jurg's patch, well I did, but came
across the same types of errors. After adding to ipaddress.c
and ifstat.c,
On Fri, Mar 17, 2006 at 12:57:32PM -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>
> fixed the problem. The hardest part was figuring out that the " on the
> 2nd mailto expressing needed to be removed. Its one of those things
> that is fairly obvious after you figure it out. :)
Heh. I wrote that script without po
>
> From: Declan Moriarty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: 2006/03/19 Sun AM 09:50:55 EST
> To: Hardened LFS Development List
> Subject: Re: gcc's --print-file specs
>
> Recently, Somebody Somewhere wrote these words
>
>
>
> > Any clues as to what may cause gcc --print-file specs to only
> > echo
Andrew Benton wrote:
Jim Gifford wrote:
Andrew Benton wrote:
Sysklog-1.4.1 seems to have a problem with asm/atomic.h
If it includes asm/processor.h then the sysklog build errors out like
this
andy:/sources/sysklogd-1.4.1$ make
gcc -O3 -DSYSV -fomit-frame-pointer -Wall -fno-strength-reduc
DJ Lucas wrote:
Jan 10, 1998 to overcome a problem with linux-2.1.18.
Whoops. Wrong long entry! Let me correct that Mar 31, 2004 to correct
a problem with 2.4 and 2.6. May still be unneeded.
-- DJ Lucas
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscrat
I've actually taken the scripts a bit further. Building GLIBC and
GCC from the raw kernel headers and only using the sanitized stuff for
everything else. On a few of the lists I have seen this done with
success and found out that this is the recommended build method for
GLIBC, still checking
On Wed, Mar 15, 2006 at 10:05:19PM -0800, Dan Nicholson wrote:
>
> Sorry to say, but it's impossible to know why `make texinfo' failed.
> However "collect2: ld returned 1 exit status" is a really bad sign.
And please follow the information in the book regarding which list to
post support questio
On Sun, Mar 19, 2006 at 02:10:16PM -0800, Jim Gifford wrote:
>I've actually taken the scripts a bit further. Building GLIBC and
> GCC from the raw kernel headers and only using the sanitized stuff for
> everything else. On a few of the lists I have seen this done with
> success and found out
In /etc/syslog.conf we still have:
# log the bootscript output:
local2.* -/var/log/boot.log
This is not a capability of the base bootscripts anymore. It was ripped
out as we can't capture boot messages before the filesystem is mounted
rw...well we can, but the method I provided was a little que
On Sun, Mar 19, 2006 at 08:38:07PM -0600, DJ Lucas wrote:
>
> Again, it's not in the base bootscripts and should be removed from the
> book unless this feature is desired again (it's still available in the
> enhanced scripts in contrib).
Please BZ this. Boot logging as part of the base was really
Archaic wrote:
On Sun, Mar 19, 2006 at 08:38:07PM -0600, DJ Lucas wrote:
Again, it's not in the base bootscripts and should be removed from the
book unless this feature is desired again (it's still available in the
enhanced scripts in contrib).
Please BZ this. Boot logging as part of the bas
Archaic wrote:
but I really have no use for interactive
mode. I considered patching it to my preference, but as I already
maintain an ever-growing patchset of personal quirks, I didn't really
want to bother.
Ooops...forgot to reply to the above. It is configurable. Set IPROMPT
to "no" in /
Archaic writes:
Wasn't it the glibc devs who screamed the loudest about headers? Have
they changed their stance or is my memory getting fuzzy in my old age?
:)
--
Archaic
In 2003, Roland actually said glibc should be built with the raw headers.
The thing he's not for is glibc maintaining
On Sun, Mar 19, 2006 at 09:16:07PM -0600, DJ Lucas wrote:
>
> Ooops...forgot to reply to the above. It is configurable. Set IPROMPT
> to "no" in /etc/sysconfig/rc. Also, I changed the mountpoint to
> /media/boottemp and had forgotten about that.
No problems. I had already patched the mount p
On Sun, Mar 19, 2006 at 07:24:13PM -0800, Jim Gifford wrote:
>
> In 2003, Roland actually said glibc should be built with the raw headers.
> The thing he's not for is glibc maintaining the headers. The original email
> was around July when Greg asked him about the headers.
Thanks for the reply,
Tell, please, when it is planned to release LFS 6.2 and LiveCD 6.2?
Spring, summer, autumn?
Thanks.
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tell, please, when it is planned to release LFS 6.2 and LiveCD 6.2?
Spring, summer, autumn?
This depends upon external factors.
1) Linux-2.6.16 should be released for painless merging of the
"udev_update" branch. This shouldn't take more than 3 weeks.
2) The issue w
On 3/19/06, Hugo Villeneuve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Hugo, your patch is right, but you don't need to adjust
> > Makefile.in.
>
> Dan, you are right that modification to Makefile.in is not necessary if the
> patch is sent upstream.
I sent the CVS diff upstream. It's an amendment to the
What's wrong with using bootlogd from util-linux? Should be able to use
that capability?
--
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
LFS User # 2577
Registered Linux User # 299986
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: S
22 matches
Mail list logo
