On Wednesday 13 September 2006 04:56, Dan Nicholson wrote:
> Drepper's checked something in to address the problem and closed the
> bug reports if anyone's interested. I haven't tested it.
>
> http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3040
> http://sourceware.org/ml/glibc-cvs/2006-q3/msg00278.
On 9/12/06, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > http://www.diy-linux.org/x86-reference-build/chroot.html#c-bash
>
> I took a look more at this. The issue is not full coverage of tests.
> The tests are run regardless (DIY says the same). They are just
> warnings that they shouldn't be run as roo
Hi Robert,
Doing a HLFS/glibc build using jhalfs and I encountered a failure
building 6.9. Linux-Headers-2.6.17.11-08232006
cp -va include/net/* /usr/include/net
is not a valid directory. Am I missing something??
G
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/hlfs-dev
FAQ: http:/
I am sorry to say this, but it would be better if LFS goes on without
me. The reasons are:
1) I am a troll, because I actually don't use LFS as my primary desktop
since 2005. All LiveCD development on my computer was done from Debian.
Yet I found LFS (actually, an extracted copy of the LiveCD)
I'm not sure if it's been mentioned in this thread, so just in case it
hasn't.
If you read the portion of code in src/init.c that deals with the
killing of processes, you can see (well "can see" is a relative term.
You need to know a bit of C code to understand it, and I very well can
have go
Hi all,
I'd like to officially welcome Bryan as a new member to our editorial
team. I don't think more introductions are needed, you (should) all know
Bryan and his work by now.
Thanks for joining the team, Bryan. Looking forward to seeing more of
your work over the time to come.
--
Gera
Peter wrote:
Chris Staub beaker67.com> writes:
That messages about running "make check-root" *are* there during the
tests run as the "dummy" user. It's not a problem or an issue with
anything - it's simply a reminder that the testsuite should also be run
as root. It's supposed to say that.
On Wed, Sep 13, 2006 at 11:25:06AM -0400, George Boudreau wrote:
> Hi Robert,
> Doing a HLFS/glibc build using jhalfs and I encountered a failure
> building 6.9. Linux-Headers-2.6.17.11-08232006
>
>cp -va include/net/* /usr/include/net
>
> is not a valid directory. Am I missing something
El Miércoles, 13 de Septiembre de 2006 19:04, Gerard Beekmans escribió:
> Hi all,
>
> I'd like to officially welcome Bryan as a new member to our editorial
> team. I don't think more introductions are needed, you (should) all know
> Bryan and his work by now.
Welcome Bryan, having new editors wit
On Wednesday 13 September 2006 20:11, Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
> I am sorry to say this, but it would be better if LFS goes on without
> me.
I feel sad of the situation in Russia behind Linux and software in
general. Your need for going away is especially painful for me.
Besides, it was wond
On Wed, Sep 13, 2006 at 11:04:10AM -0600, Gerard Beekmans wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'd like to officially welcome Bryan as a new member to our editorial
> team. I don't think more introductions are needed, you (should) all know
> Bryan and his work by now.
>
Welcome onboard!
Ken
--
das eine Mal
On Wed, Sep 13, 2006 at 10:11:15PM +0600, Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
>
> So, I decided that I should not give any advice to the LFS project at
> all rather than questionable advice based on Debian and obsolete versions.
>
Alexander, your advice has been invaluable. I hope that in the
future
El Miércoles, 13 de Septiembre de 2006 18:11, Alexander E. Patrakov escribió:
> I am sorry to say this, but it would be better if LFS goes on without
> me.
I hope that at least you continue sending posts and comments. Your
contributions are very appreciated.
>
> This also means that LFS should
On 9/13/06, Kevin Buckley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 13/09/06, Randy McMurchy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ...
> Not all of the GNOME apps require
> all 17 of those packages you listed. Your list really is only
> accurate for GnuCash and perhaps some others.
That's also news to me, I had ass
Gerard Beekmans wrote:
> I'd like to officially welcome Bryan as a new member to our editorial
> team.
Thanks Gerard, and everybody!
In case anyone's keeping track: I'd like to start by (after finishing my
multilib CLFS-then-modified-BLFS build) working on the udev rules
documentation. That is,
Hi,
what is the current HLFS status? Is project temporary stopped or is it
completely dead? It obviously is not in active development.
What are we waiting for? How can I, HLFS (Glibc) user help you to bring
HLFS further?
- Mordae
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/hl
It's active, but I seem to be the only maintainer and I work 55 hours per
week. There are several things I'd like to complete before a stable
release... stuff like fixing most of the compiler warnings, finding how to
get all the testsuites to pass, auditing the patches. The combination of gcc4
So, I decided that I should not give any advice to the LFS project at
all rather than questionable advice based on Debian and obsolete versions.
Thanks for everything you have done for this project.
--
Nathan Coulson (conathan)
--
nathan at linuxfromscratch org
conathan at gmail com
--
http
On 9/13/06, Nathan Coulson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So, I decided that I should not give any advice to the LFS project at
> all rather than questionable advice based on Debian and obsolete versions.
Thanks for everything you have done for this project.
Thanks a lot, Alexander. The LFS proj
Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
> I am sorry to say this, but it would be better if LFS goes on without
> me.
I'm sorry, but this is not true, at least from the LFS point of view.
You have contributed a lot. However, I do understand your viewpoint.
Please consider continuing to participate in whate
Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
> I am sorry to say this, but it would be better if LFS goes on without
> me.
Dang. I completely understand why you're doing this, but that doesn't
make it any easier.
Well, I do hope we'll see you again in the future. I also hope you
won't mind making an occasional
On 9/13/06, Bryan Kadzban <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Gerard Beekmans wrote:
> I'd like to officially welcome Bryan as a new member to our editorial
> team.
Thanks Gerard, and everybody!
Congrats, Bryan. Glad to have you here. With today's other unfortunate
announcement, you have vaulted up the
Alexander E. Patrakov ums.usu.ru> writes:
>
> I am sorry to say this, but it would be better if LFS goes on without
> me. The reasons are:
Your work has been greatly appreciated.
> 1) I am a troll, because I actually don't use LFS as my primary desktop
> since 2005.
Then that makes me a Fe
> > How can I add the command that initiates output
to the log file so I would know it was in the "dummy"
user section.
> `set -x` see bash(1) for details (described in the SHELL BUILTIN
COMMANDS section).
That does the trick.
Thanks,
Peter
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinf
On 9/13/06, Peter Ennis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> `set -x` see bash(1) for details (described in the SHELL BUILTIN
COMMANDS section).
One other thing to know about `set -x'. Set PS4 to something so that
you don't get the ugly '+ ' prefix. I like PS4='cmd: '.
--
Dan
--
http://linuxfromscrat
Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
> I am sorry to say this, but it would be better if LFS goes on without
> me.
Not like me to agree with Bruce,:-) but in this case...
I'll miss your contributions, Alexander, you are a real professional.
R.
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ
26 matches
Mail list logo
