Robert Connolly wrote:
> On Thursday October 9 2008 06:21:37 pm Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>
>> Should there be a mention of the possible use of SHA password encryption?
>>
>
> Using MD5 or SHA can be kept simple by using all the default options for SHA,
> and mentioning that there are more option
DJ Lucas wrote:
> Randy McMurchy wrote:
>> I used the readlink command in the Udev instructions to move
>> the .so files to /usr/lib as they are initially installed in
>> /lib. Credit Dan Nicholson for the initial work on this change.
>> This was started in BLFS and I believe it to be the right
>>
Randy McMurchy wrote:
>
> Um, DJ, I was speaking of the .so files, not the actual libraries.
>
>
Oops. Sorry for the noise.
-- DJ Lucas
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content, and is believed to be clean.
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
F
Hi all,
Seems I overlooked getting the update of Module-init-tools
into the book. Doing that now.
--
Randy
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
DJ Lucas wrote:
> Randy McMurchy wrote:
>> Not sure how DJ worked out that 'make check' did something.
>>
> Never actually validated it. The make test command failed, so IIRC, I
> greped the makefile for "test", and then "check", and there it was.
I noted that it didn't do anything too. I su
Jeremy Henty wrote:
> We are going to release Dillo2 soon and so I would like to update its
> BLFS Wiki page. I have logged on to my Trac account but I don't get
> any option to edit the page. What should I do now?
We had a permissions issue that I fixed. Please try it again.
-- Bruce
--
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> I noted that it didn't do anything too. I suppose we need to now add:
>
> "This package does not come with a test suite."
That was done during the package update. :-)
--
Randy
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/fa
Randy McMurchy wrote:
> Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>
>> I noted that it didn't do anything too. I suppose we need to now add:
>>
>> "This package does not come with a test suite."
>
> That was done during the package update. :-)
Obviously I didn't check. I should have known better. :)
-- Bruce
-
Hi all,
There's a minor ticket about explaining what the installation
commands in the Linux Headers installation do, and it occurred
to me that is it possible that there's a redundant step?
Here's the existing commands (with my comments for the
book inserted as well):
First ensure the source tre
DJ Lucas wrote:
> Randy McMurchy wrote:
>> Jeremy Huntwork wrote these words on 10/06/08 10:45 CST:
>>
>>
>>> I would think that adding it to the Host Requirements page would be
>>> slightly preferable. Here's my thinking:
>>>
>>> We already have bison as a host req. Bison depends on m4, so mos
2008/10/11 Randy McMurchy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hi all,
>
> There's a minor ticket about explaining what the installation
> commands in the Linux Headers installation do, and it occurred
> to me that is it possible that there's a redundant step?
...
> Now here is where I don't really see the need
Reece Dunn wrote:
> I asked this question on 21/11/2007 ("Linux Headers question"
> [http://linuxfromscratch.org/pipermail/lfs-dev/2007-November/060618.html]),
> which likely resulted in that ticket item. I got essentially the same
> response from Thomas Trepl and Mark Rosenstand:
>
> Thomas Trep
Randy McMurchy wrote:
> Sorry for quoting the entire previous post, but the material is
> all relevant, and we need to make a decision. Here's the choices:
>
> 1. Use Jeremy's suggestion that since Bison is already a prerequisite,
> which mean that m4 is probably on the host as well, simply disre
Chapter 5 glibc test suite cannot be run due to lacking g++, so the book
should be changed to reflect that. Actually, it can, but it will fail
if the host's gcc < 4.2.x due to the mtune flag. Also, I noticed that
the remap="check" and remap="test" both are captured unconditionally in
jhalfs-2
DJ Lucas wrote:
> Also, I noticed that
> the remap="check" and remap="test" both are captured unconditionally in
> jhalfs-2.3.1
Ouch. I meant in chapter05/031-glibc. Sorry, should have clarified.
-- DJ Lucas
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content, and is believed
DJ Lucas wrote:
> Chapter 5 glibc test suite cannot be run due to lacking g++, so the book
> should be changed to reflect that. Actually, it can, but it will fail
> if the host's gcc < 4.2.x due to the mtune flag.
>
I added removed both patches, the check command, and all explanatory
text an
Hi all,
Does anyone have a little cheat sheet or some notes handy
that would help me use jhalfs for the first time. I have
a decently fast x86 machine with a spare partition that
isn't doing anything right now.
I've never used the jhalfs utility. I don't even know
where to download it from. Any h
On Sat, Oct 11, 2008 at 02:16:18PM -0500, Randy McMurchy wrote:
> Reece Dunn wrote:
>
> > I asked this question on 21/11/2007 ("Linux Headers question"
> > [http://linuxfromscratch.org/pipermail/lfs-dev/2007-November/060618.html]),
> > which likely resulted in that ticket item. I got essentially t
DJ Lucas wrote:
> OK?
Sounds good to me.
--
Randy
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
t sheet...but you want the latest version from SVN. It
uses the same config interface as the kernel's make menuconfig and is
pretty much self explanatory.
svn co svn://svn.linuxfromscratch.org/ALFS/jhalfs/trunk jhalfs-20081011 &&
cd jhalfs-20081011 &&
make
# if you do not choos
DJ Lucas wrote:
> This package does come with a test suite, however, it cannot be
> run at this time because we do not have a C++ compiler yet.
>
Actually, I've never seen any discussion on this, but I believe that it
was suggested to be more "personal" in one of the bugs opened by Gera
DJ Lucas wrote:
> DJ Lucas wrote:
>> This package does come with a test suite, however, it cannot be
>> run at this time because we do not have a C++ compiler yet.
>>
> Actually, I've never seen any discussion on this, but I believe that it
> was suggested to be more "personal" in one o
Randy McMurchy wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> Author: dj
>> Date: 2008-10-11 17:39:51 -0600 (Sat, 11 Oct 2008)
>> New Revision: 8641
>>
>> Modified:
>>trunk/BOOK/chapter01/changelog.xml
>>trunk/BOOK/chapter05/glibc.xml
>> Log:
>> removed chapter 5 glibc test suite
>>
>
> See
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Since M4 is basically a short CMMI install at 0.2 SBU and 10M disk, I'd
> prefer
> to see it retained in Chapter 5 and moved. It may not be strictly necessary
> but
> the overhead of doing so is really negligible and the more we build using our
> own tools without relyin
Hi all,
I'm probably off-line the rest of the night as my son is
playing in a college football game on TV and it's about to
start. I'm going to sit back, relax and watch it.
--
Randy
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: S
Randy McMurchy wrote:
> my son is
> playing in a college football game on TV and it's about to
> start. I'm going to sit back, relax and watch it.
>
How cool! Enjoy!
-- DJ Lucas
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content, and is believed to be clean.
--
http://lin
LFS Trac wrote:
> #2056: Consider using --disable-shared for gcc pass 1
> +---
> Reporter: [EMAIL PROTECTED] |Owner: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Type: enhancement | Status: closed
Randy McMurchy wrote:
> LFS Trac wrote:
>
>> #2056: Consider using --disable-shared for gcc pass 1
>> +---
>> Reporter: [EMAIL PROTECTED] |Owner: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Type: enhancement |
Randy McMurchy wrote:
> LFS Trac wrote:
>> #2056: Consider using --disable-shared for gcc pass 1
>> Changes (by [EMAIL PROTECTED]):
>>
>> * resolution: => fixed
>>
>> Comment:
>>
>> Fixed in r8647.
>
> [Football game over :-) ]
>
> In my opinion, this puts the objective of releasing the new
>
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Randy McMurchy wrote:
>
>> LFS Trac wrote:
>>
>>> #2056: Consider using --disable-shared for gcc pass 1
>>> Changes (by [EMAIL PROTECTED]):
>>>
>>> * resolution: => fixed
>>>
>>> Comment:
>>>
>>> Fixed in r8647.
>>>
>> [Football game over :-) ]
>>
>> In my op
http://wiki.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/ticket/2156
I have changed my copy of the book to read.
As an alternative to installing a separate distribution onto your machine,
you
may wish to use the Linux From Scratch LiveCD. The CD works well as a host
system, providing all the tools y
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> http://wiki.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/ticket/2156
>
> I have changed my copy of the book to read.
>
> As an alternative to installing a separate distribution onto your machine,
> you
> may wish to use the Linux From Scratch LiveCD. The CD works well as a host
>
DJ Lucas wrote:
> No. IIUC, it doesn't contain m4 and cannot build current trunk until m4
> is moved up in chapter 5, however, as soon as that happens, the text
> above should work nicely.
False. It uses autoreconf on some packages, and this can't work without
m4. And indeed, it does contain /
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> http://wiki.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/ticket/2156
>
> I have changed my copy of the book to read.
>
> As an alternative to installing a separate distribution onto your machine,
> you
> may wish to use the Linux From Scratch LiveCD. The CD works well as a host
34 matches
Mail list logo
