In the "LFS and Standards" part of the 6.8 preface, it lists the Single
Unix Specification Version 3. A couple points:
A) SUSv4 shipped in 2008.
B) SUSv4 actually comes from (and is approved by) other standards
bodies, it's also known as POSIX-2008, IEEE Std 1003.1, and The Open
Group base speci
I'm automating LFS 6.8, and two of the patches don't apply with busybox
patch:
1) gcc-4.5.2-startfiles_fix-1.patch
Requires "fuzz" support, which I didn't implement because it tends to
mis-apply patches. (This is not the same as applying at an offset, this
is discarding context lines in order to
Rob Landley wrote:
> In the "LFS and Standards" part of the 6.8 preface, it lists the Single
> Unix Specification Version 3. A couple points:
>
> A) SUSv4 shipped in 2008.
>
> B) SUSv4 actually comes from (and is approved by) other standards
> bodies, it's also known as POSIX-2008, IEEE Std 1003
Rob Landley wrote:
> I'm automating LFS 6.8, and two of the patches don't apply with busybox
> patch:
>
> 1) gcc-4.5.2-startfiles_fix-1.patch
>
> Requires "fuzz" support, which I didn't implement because it tends to
> mis-apply patches. (This is not the same as applying at an offset, this
> is d
I've been working on bootscripts. Basically, I'm rewriting them to get
a better understanding. I may end up throwing them out completely but I
want to discuss the issue of error handling.
There are three bootscript files that use the
read ENTER
construct: checkfs, udev, and functions.
I
On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 3:55 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> I've been working on bootscripts. Basically, I'm rewriting them to get
> a better understanding. I may end up throwing them out completely but I
> want to discuss the issue of error handling.
>
> There are three bootscript files that use the
>
On 07/08/2011 11:00 AM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>> 2) rm "$SRCDIR"/procps-3.2.8-fix_HZ_errors-1.patch || exit 1
>
>> The path has a "//" which means -p1 winds up with an absolute path after
>> discarding one "/".
>
> I'm not sure what you mean here with the 'rm ... |exit 1', but the patch
> applies c
Zachary Kotlarek wrote:
> On Jul 7, 2011, at 10:05 PM, Bryan Kadzban wrote:
>> I dislike having the DHCP client update DNS on its own, because (a)
>> that requires some sort of authentication to do correctly (rather
>> than just a shared key between the DHCP and DNS servers, which is
>> what I h
On Friday 08 July 2011 17:55:09 Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> I've been working on bootscripts. Basically, I'm rewriting them to get
> a better understanding. I may end up throwing them out completely but I
> want to discuss the issue of error handling.
>
> There are three bootscript files that use the
>
