On Wed, 4 Aug 2010 19:03:37 -0500, William Immendorf
wrote:
> Well, it's a Glibc issue, as GCC 4.5.1 is just a bugfix release, so
> GCC 4.5.1/Glibc 2.11 would compile M4 out of the box, while GCC
> 4.5.1/Glibc 2.12 needs my sed to fix it. It's a Glibc 2.12 issue, no
> dobut.
No, it's not an iss
On Wed, 4 Aug 2010 23:56:41 +0100, Ken Moffat
wrote:
>
> On x86_64, with glibc-2.12.1 and otherwise the 20100803 book, in
> pass 2 glibc the build failed in libgomp with
>
> configure: error: unsupported system, cannot find sizeof (omp_lock_t)
> make[1]: *** [configure-target-libgomp] Error 1
>
On 8/4/10 6:56 PM, Ken Moffat wrote:
> Actually, this is the first problem I saw, but I've waited until the final
> toolchain was completed before I mention it.
>
> On x86_64, with glibc-2.12.1 and otherwise the 20100803 book, in
> pass 2 glibc the build failed in libgomp with
>
> configure: error:
On 08/04/2010 10:38 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Not that it makes any difference to this discussion, but I prefer to use
/usr/src/(pkgname)/ for source tarballs. I sometimes build there and
sometimes in /tmp
e.g.
DIR=`pwd`
PROGRAM=xchat-2.6.2
LOG=$DIR/$PROGRAM.log
TITLE=$PROGRAM
TIMEFORMAT="$TIMEFM
I have a script that runs on one of my servers every 6 hours. It
downloads the latest version of the LFS book from svn, parses the urls
from it and then downloads the required files into appropriate
directories. Oftentimes, this breaks on patches because it takes some
time for the book on quant
Dan McGhee wrote:
> On 08/04/2010 10:38 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>> Not that it makes any difference to this discussion, but I prefer to use
>> /usr/src/(pkgname)/ for source tarballs. I sometimes build there and
>> sometimes in /tmp
>>
>> e.g.
>>
>> DIR=`pwd`
>> PROGRAM=xchat-2.6.2
>> LOG=$DIR/$PRO
Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
> I have a script that runs on one of my servers every 6 hours. It
> downloads the latest version of the LFS book from svn, parses the urls
> from it and then downloads the required files into appropriate
> directories. Oftentimes, this breaks on patches because it takes s
On 5 August 2010 22:20, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
>>
>> The following patch has been trying to download for the past couple of
>> days, indicating that something is wrong:
>>
>> On 8/5/10 12:00 PM, fcron wrote:
>>> Retrieving file: glibc-2.11.2-makefile_fix-1.patch
>
> I just co
Still building my new system (I've just got to the gnome packages),
and the experience after LFS wasn't catastrophic.
So far, one build failure with the glibc changes (nfs-utils - I'm
stuck on 1.2.0, will be looking at upgrading once the build has
finished).
Rather more failures with make-3.82, a
On 8/5/10 5:20 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>
> I just copied it from glibc-2.12.1-makefile_fix-1.patch so it should be
> OK now.
OK. Any idea why it failed? If there's a bug in the rendering scripts,
we should probably identify it.
Jeremy
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ:
Ken Moffat wrote:
> Wearing my pedant's hat,
>
> you copied it _to_ 2.12.1, I committed Matt's patch as 2.11.2 a few hours
> ago (he posted it to one of the lists to say he doesn't have svn access at the
> moment).
Say again. I'm having a problem parsing what you want me to do.
-- Bruce
-
On 6 August 2010 00:55, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Ken Moffat wrote:
>
>> Wearing my pedant's hat,
>>
>> you copied it _to_ 2.12.1, I committed Matt's patch as 2.11.2 a few hours
>> ago (he posted it to one of the lists to say he doesn't have svn access at
>> the
>> moment).
>
> Say again. I'm havin
Could I get your script ?
and fcron line to run script !
my mail: pham.the.chu...@gmail.com
Thank you !
2010/8/6 Bruce Dubbs
> Ken Moffat wrote:
>
> > Wearing my pedant's hat,
> >
> > you copied it _to_ 2.12.1, I committed Matt's patch as 2.11.2 a few
> hours
> > ago (he posted it to one of th
13 matches
Mail list logo
