Nathan Coulson wrote:
> I was wondering, if using --enable-kvm --drive file=os.img,if=virtio
> would give any noticable improvement
>
> --enable-kvm, use the virtualization instructions in the processor (faster)
> --drive file=os.img,if=virtio, (Requires VIRTIO_BLK in kernel),
>
> threw a thread
I have another reason to dislike fedora. I wanted to look at what
environment variables were used and did a simple 'set' command. I got a
bunch of garbage. Upon investigating, I got about 70 lines of
variables and about 9600! lines of functions that could easily be in a
script. Blech.
Gerard Beekmans wrote:
> On 02/02/2012 15:25, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>> I have another reason to dislike fedora. I wanted to look at what
>> environment variables were used and did a simple 'set' command. I got a
>> bunch of garbage. Upon investigating, I got abo
Nathan Coulson wrote:
>
> I was wondering, if using --enable-kvm --drive file=os.img,if=virtio
> would give any noticable improvement
>
> --enable-kvm, use the virtualization instructions in the processor (faster)
> --drive file=os.img,if=virtio, (Requires VIRTIO_BLK in kernel),
I haven't had a c
Bryan Kadzban wrote:
> Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>> The section 7.2.1. Creating stable names for network interfaces
>> failed.
>
> Argh. Again.
>
>> Running manually gives:
>>
>> <...>
>>
>> This program is for debugging only, it does n
In the poweroff/reboot procedures mountfs does:
umount -a -d -r -t notmpfs,nosysfs >/dev/null
We probably want to add nodevtmpfs to that list. It was giving me some
errors without.
--
BTW, I can't get over how fast kvm reboots. It does take about 20
seconds to shut down, but most of tha
Dean Takemori wrote:
> I'm trying to setup multiple instances of rsyslog (one for kernel
> messages) using lfs-bootscripts-20120116 and running into some
> problems.
>
> I'm using rsyslogd 5.8.6, which is designed with multiple instance
> support. I've set up one configuration file (/etc/rsysklog
de...@hawaii.rr.com wrote:
> Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>>> BTW: statusproc() defined in /lib/lsb/init-functions has an "exit 1" just
>>> after
>>> it prints its Usage statement; shouldn't this be a "return 1" instead?
>> statusproc is a funct
Gilles Espinasse wrote:
>> From: "Tobias Gasser"
>>> zlib 1.2.6 seems to have some issues.
>>>
>>> building partimage 0.6.9 fails with several errors in imagefile.cpp
>>>
> I send one mail to Mark Adler and the answer is :
> "Upon examination, I see that both module-init-tools-3.16 and partimag
Matt Burgess wrote:
> On Sat, 2012-02-04 at 14:58 -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>
>> I thought we dropped module-init-tools in favor of kmod. However there
>> are several places that still mention module-init-tools:
>> dependencies.xml, whatsnew.xml (commented out), patch
Ken Moffat wrote:
> Experimentation shows that the checkfs script now writes to
> /dev/null during fsck (line 82):
> fsck ${options} -a -A -C -T >/dev/null
Yes, I did that in November. I can't recall the details why I did that.
I think it had to do with the formatting of the boot script outp
Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
> On 2/3/12 2:02 AM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>> and all 18 lines of output in boot.log are done in 3 seconds. Since
>> udev is started at 1.08 seconds, that's 4 seconds to the login prompt
>> form the grub selection.
>
> Yep, I am experiencing th
Forwarding to lfs-dev.
John Burrell wrote:
> Bruce - strictly lfs - sorry, but I'm not registered in lfs-support.
>
> I replaced module-init-tools with kmod.
>
> In the configure --libdir=/lib
>
> This means that kmod puts libkmod.pc in /lib/pkgconfig
Yes it does.
> Of course, there are many
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Ken Moffat wrote:
>
>> Experimentation shows that the checkfs script now writes to
>> /dev/null during fsck (line 82):
>> fsck ${options} -a -A -C -T >/dev/null
>
> Yes, I did that in November. I can't recall the details why I did t
Ken Moffat wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 04, 2012 at 04:31:09PM -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>> Forwarding to lfs-dev.
>>
>> John Burrell wrote:
>>> Bruce - strictly lfs - sorry, but I'm not registered in lfs-support.
>>>
>>> I replaced module-init-to
Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
> On 2/4/12 4:41 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>> Increased or decreased? How much?
>
> Sorry, yes, decreased.
>
> Hmm, but with already minimal systems like ours, apparently not enough
> to really matter. I hadn't accurately measured the differenc
Ken Moffat wrote:
> Don't get me started on trying to use my android phone for email!
> Or the lfs tests for 'suspicious headers' in email.
The Xoom tablet, android based, is not much better. Perhaps it has a
little larger (soft) keyboard, but it's still clumsy. I looked and
looked for a wa
Bryan Kadzban wrote:
> Ken Moffat wrote:
>> I don't have kmod source handy, so I can't tell if it will take an
>> overide in the same way.
>
> Both kmod and xz needed a "pkgconfigdir=/usr/lib/pkgconfig" override on
> the "make install" command line for me, when I built both recently. I
> also pa
Matt Burgess wrote:
> On Sat, 2012-02-04 at 17:45 -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>
>> libdir=/lib
>> includedir=/usr/include
>>
>> Name: libkmod
>> Description: Library to deal with kernel modules
>> Version: 4
>> Libs: -L${libdir} -lkmod
>>
Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
> Yes, the difference in complexity I was referring to was not really how
> complex an LFS system could become, but rather between our typically
> sparse function libraries/scripts and that of a satisfy-everyone distro.
> Apparently in Ubuntu, the switch to dash as sh for
Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
> On 2/4/12 8:04 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>> If you know of any issues it the current scripts, let me know.
>
> Off the top of my head, the use of 'echo -e' and 'echo -n' is not
> handled the same in every shell. Switching
We are starting to plan for LFS-7.1. We are anticipating an -rc1
release in about two weeks and lfs-7.1 around the first of March.
Right now there are only two relatively routine package updates in the
ticket queue: the kernel and automake.
http://wiki.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/query?status=ass
Ken Moffat wrote:
> When I was previously editing here, I was persuaded that the date
> in the BLFS book should be the date it would next be rendered
> online. From memory, Bruce has a cron job to do that in the morning,
> in his timezone. So, when I came back here, I've mostly tried to
> adhere
William Tracy wrote:
> If the plans to include initramfs go forward, would those be targeted for
> 8.0?
We wouldn't do those before 7.1, but I'm inclined to put the initramfs
instructions into BLFS and forward reference that in LFS for those that
want to do that. I definately would not recommen
Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
> On 2/7/12 12:21 AM, Bryan Kadzban wrote:
>> Um, it's not missing. It's not in this list, correct:
>>
>>> for target in depmod insmod modinfo modprobe rmmod; do
>>>ln -sv ../bin/kmod /sbin/$target
>>> done
>> But it is here, one line below:
>>
>>> ln -sv kmod /bin/lsmod
Jean-Philippe MENGUAL wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The LFS-fr team translates, without any guidelines but depending on
> contributor's will, the hints of the project. Among these, the team
> translated this aon
> http://demo.accelibreinfo.eu/more_control_and_pkg_man_v1_4.txt. But the
> translator was surpri
Qrux wrote:
> Problem in /sbin/ifup:
>
> ==
> for S in ${SERVICES}; do
> if [ ! -n "${S}" -o ! -x "/lib/services/${S}" ]; then
>MSG="\nUnable to process ${file}. Either "
>MSG="${MSG}the SERVICE variable was not set "
>MSG="${MSG}or the specified service cannot be executed."
>log
Pierre Labastie wrote:
> Le 05/02/2012 20:16, Bruce Dubbs a �crit :
>> We are starting to plan for LFS-7.1.
> There was also a discussion of putting a ldconfig instruction at some place
> near the end of chapter 6. I tested it removes the difference between
> ld.so.cache it
Jean-Philippe MENGUAL wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Le jeudi 16 février 2012 à 09:53 -0700, Matthew Burgess a écrit :
>> On Thu, 16 Feb 2012 09:51:34 +0100, Jean-Philippe MENGUAL I assume
>> your user is reporting against LFS-7.0? If that's the case, I'm
>> sure you can understand we can't go and change those
Matthew Burgess wrote:
> I had a quick look at the Makefile and make-aux-files.sh script and couldn't
> see why that line is required. Bruce, is there a reason those .script files
> are
> deleted?
It's cleanup. For jhalfs, it would be better if a different set of
rules were used if different
Pierre Labastie wrote:
> jhalfs needs an xml file to process for extracting commands scripts.
> 'index.xml' in book sources is the most obvious choice. But using this file
> leads necessary to try to find the '.script' entities, which have been
> deleted or do not exist.
> Another choice is to u
Thomas Pegg wrote:
> cd ${PROGNAME}-$LFSVRS; bash process-scripts.sh >> $LOGDIR/$LOG 2>&1 ; cd ..
May I suggest: pushd ${PROGNAME}-$LFSVRS; ...; popd
It's a little more robust.
-- Bruce
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubs
The Linux From Scratch community is pleased to announce the release of
LFS Version 7.1-rc1. This is the first release candidate on the road to
LFS-7.1. This It is an incremental release with updates from LFS-7.0 to
20 packages as well as fixes to bootscripts and text throughout the book.
We en
Pierre Labastie wrote:
> Le 20/02/2012 04:45, Bruce Dubbs a écrit :
>> The Linux From Scratch community is pleased to announce the release of
>> LFS Version 7.1-rc1. This is the first release candidate on the road to
>> LFS-7.1. This It is an incremental release with updates
Pierre Labastie wrote:
> Le 20/02/2012 11:27, Bruce Dubbs a écrit :
>> Pierre Labastie wrote:
>>> Le 20/02/2012 04:45, Bruce Dubbs a écrit :
>>>> The Linux From Scratch community is pleased to announce the release of
>>>> LFS Version 7.1-rc1. [...]
>&g
Andrew Benton wrote:
> Hello,
> I notice that on the BLFS pages for dash and zsh we add them
> to /etc/shells so that people can change their shell with chsh
> (installed as part of shadow).
> However, grepping through LFS for /etc/shells finds
> nothing. /etc/shells is not needed until we install
Qrux wrote:
> Bruce, Nathan, et al.,
>
> I've run into an interesting issue with our ifup/bridge/ipv4-static
> trinity-of-awesome, and it's closely related to Bruce's gut feeling
> that CHECK_LINK was...not quite right. Turns out, CHECK_LINK makes
> perfect sense--it was the bridge script that wa
Qrux wrote:
> On Feb 25, 2012, at 9:14 AM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Still, it seems awfully specious to say: "It's only the number of
> files that needs to coincide; everything else is gravy." The files
> are indeed supposed to be match the interfaces; that's why th
Qrux wrote:
>> if test -n "${MTU}"; then
>> if [[ ${MTU} =~ ^[0-9]+$ ]] -a [[ $MTU -ge 68 ]] ; then
>> ip link set dev ${IFACE} mtu $MTU
>> else
>> echo "Invalid MTU $MTU"
>> fi
>> fi
>
> Yeah, that looks good. Is 68 some absolute kernel minimum? Does
> that consider stuff like SL
Qrux wrote:
> Probably something like:
>
> BRIDGE_PORTS="eth0 eth1"
It's getting complicated. We then need to consider address1, dhcp2,
etc. What we have now works for kvm, but a general solution is more
difficult.
-- Bruce
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
F
Qrux wrote:
> Practically, I've had to change to a lower one for PPP connections,
> and higher ones for better gigE throughput. Some people have modems;
> others have machines in a data center.
>
> I don't think it's about the applicability of the setting.
I don't either. I was just saying th
Qrux wrote:
> On Feb 25, 2012, at 8:12 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>
>> Qrux wrote:
>>
>>> Probably something like:
>>>
>>> BRIDGE_PORTS="eth0 eth1"
>> It's getting complicated. We then need to consider address1, dhcp2,
>&
Bryan Kadzban wrote:
> Qrux wrote:
>> For 7.2 & beyond...
>>
>> Bridge-utils is not dissimilar from udev, in that it's a userspace
>> tool for a kernel. And, it's certainly no less optional than
>> inettools.
>
> I disagree -- assuming by "inettools" you mean "inetutils", because the
> former i
I was looking at the instructions for util-linux and notice that we use
--enable-arch. Does anyone remember why? When I 'man arch', it says
"arch is a deprecated command since util-linux 2.13. Use uname -m or
use arch from the GNU coreutils package."
I did check coreutils and --enable-ins
Steve Crosby wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 5:14 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>> I was looking at the instructions for util-linux and notice that we use
>> --enable-arch. Does anyone remember why? When I 'man arch', it says
>> "arch is a deprecated command
Matt Burgess wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-02-27 at 08:33 +0100, Gilles Espinasse wrote:
>
>> Each configure run arch at 2 different path and look to satisfy from
>> 'unknow' answer
>> /bin/arch = `(/bin/arch) 2>/dev/null || echo
>> unknown`
>> /usr/bin/arch -k = `(/usr/bin
Andrew Benton wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Feb 2012 11:43:11 -0600
> Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>
>> I'm going to remove it from my working copy of the book and make a test
>> run to see if not having it runs into any problems.
>>
>> I do want to leave it in for 7.1
Qrux wrote:
> On Feb 27, 2012, at 4:35 PM, Nathan Coulson wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 12:22 PM, Qrux wrote:
>>> When all is said and done, I'm talking about two tiny little
"packages" (bridge-utils and ethtool) that amount to probably 2
executables that control and expose kernel features
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Andrew Benton wrote:
>> On Mon, 27 Feb 2012 11:43:11 -0600
>> Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>>
>>> I'm going to remove it from my working copy of the book and make a
>>> test run to see if not having it runs into any problems.
>>>
&g
Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
> I'd like to commit this to trunk, but I want to hear opinions first.
Whoa. We've released lfs-7.1-rc1 and need to keep svn in sync until the
7.1 release is made.
-- Bruce
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/
Fernando de Oliveira wrote:
> Em 28-02-2012 01:25, Bruce Dubbs escreveu:
>> Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
>>
>>> I'd like to commit this to trunk, but I want to hear opinions first.
>> Whoa. We've released lfs-7.1-rc1 and need to keep svn in sync until the
&
Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
> On 2/27/12 11:10 PM, Bryan Kadzban wrote:
>> The 64-bit x86 SysV ABI *REQUIRES* /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 to be the
>> runtime linker path. (This is a far more fundamental standard than LSB,
>> as well.) See the (google-docs-import-from-PDF) version of the ABI
>> standa
Guys, lets be careful with our wording. These are complex things and
it's easy to misunderstand the technical aspects of what is going on and
we don't want to say anything that someone might misread and take offense.
There are a lot of things going on in the Linux world right now. Some
want t
Nathan Coulson wrote:
> for myself, I have always liked fdisk's style to parted, which is
> probably why I went to gptfdisk all those years ago. If I recall,
> parted has less control over the partition types then fdisk/gptfdisk
> (ex:/ I couldn't make a boot partition). that was a year or two a
Qrux wrote:
> It's not about whether or not it's "fixable".
>
> The point is the time.
>
> It takes time to figure these things out. This one small
> issue--originally intended as a potential alert to the impact that these
> changes might have--has already involved 3 people and several hou
Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
> This discussion isn't about
> trying to get lib64 changes into the book in the very near future. It
> should be about how sysroot affects the bootstrap process,
OK, let's start over. I tried to follow what you are saying, but wasn't
able to understand it completely.
Qrux wrote:
> On Mar 1, 2012, at 11:55 AM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>
>> Qrux wrote:
>>
>>> I'm not sure why there's so much opposition to it.
>> There isn't opposition to testing, but who is going to do all the
>> testing needed?
>
> I
Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
> On 3/1/12 2:47 PM, Gerard Beekmans wrote:
>> The scheduled outage for tonight has been cancelled as the data centre
>> completed all the work last night.
>
> Aww, and I was so looking forward to it! :)
No. Back to work!:)
-- Bruce
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org
Qrux wrote:
> I assume LFS is often not used -as is-, unless it's being run
> console-only (which is usable, but seems like a harsh working
> environment). I'm guessing that use-case is rare. I would also
> guess most people either run it headless but connect via SSH, or run
> it with X; the poi
Greg Schafer wrote:
> On Thu, 01 Mar 2012 16:27:31 -0500, Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
>
>> And that's it. It's cleaner, more direct, and more closely tracks what
>> upstream has provided.
>
> I'm sorry to say this but your whole premise is based on hearsay and
> personal opinion.
>
> Instead of vagu
Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
> On 3/1/12 3:48 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>> Could you please explain (again) the advantages of your proposal over
>> the current process.
>
> The biggest advantages are that we don't have to maintain a patch that
> reverts upstream changes to ma
Any objections to releasing 7.1?
There have been three changes since -rc1:
1 text,
1 change to the ifup script, and
a patch for glibc from upstream to fix dlopen (identified in the
soprano build).
-- Bruce
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linux
Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
> On 3/2/12 12:44 AM, Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
>> when using sysroot as opposed to not. The "+"s are with sysroot.
>
> Sorry, that's backwards - I made one patch originally the other way and
> then regdiffed it a second time later.
>
> The top line of the diff should be desc
The Linux From Scratch community is pleased to announce the release of
LFS Version 7.1. It is an incremental release with updates from LFS-7.0
to 20 packages as well as fixes to bootscripts and text throughout the book.
You can read the book online at
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/7.
Qrux wrote:
> On Mar 2, 2012, at 4:26 PM, James Robertson wrote:
>> On Mar 1, 2012 2:49 PM, "Ken Moffat"
>> wrote:
>>> Actually, we used to have a guy who did run production servers -
>>> but he spent a lot of time keeping them up to date, and he built
>>> on one machine and then rolled the binari
Ken Moffat wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 02, 2012 at 10:07:26PM -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>> Qrux wrote:
>>> *whew* I was starting to think I was the only one who'd ever
>>> considered running LFS (or a very close derivative) in production.
>> I've been doin
Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
>
> I think the reason this comes up is because LFS is made up of a
> limited number of developers (essentially hobbyists) that don't have
> the time and resources to track down all security issues.
I think the term hobbyist as used here is somewhat misleading. Everyone
i
Qrux wrote:
> Does anyone know of any actual vulnerabilities in LFS-proper (either
> 7.0 or 7.1)?
>
> I'm not asking about hypothetical concerns, and for the purpose of
> this discussion, I'm not asking about BLFS. I'm not asking if the
> books make any claim about security, either. In fact, I
Andrew Benton wrote:
> I only removed packages that I knew weren't coming back and I don't
> think any of them were edited less than a year ago. The packages I've
> removed from the book today are just commented out to make it easier to
> revert if needed.
Exactly the right approach IMO.
-- B
Matt Burgess wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-03-05 at 21:06 +, Matt Burgess wrote:
>
>
>> That led me to wonder why we bother passing the other '--enable' options
>> (partx, arch and write). For reference, Bruce brought up 'arch' in
>> http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/pipermail/lfs-dev/2012-February/06
Matt Burgess wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-03-05 at 16:00 -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>
>> My proposal is to just skip 'arch' completely as I do not believe it is
>> not used anywhere in LFS/BLFS.
>
> Ah yes, so it is. Do you mind if I make that change as part o
Andrew Benton wrote:
> On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 16:00:38 -0600
> Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>
>> My proposal is to just skip 'arch' completely as I do not believe it is
>> not used anywhere in LFS/BLFS.
>
> It is used in several places in BLFS (eg the pages for Liba52
Lemon Lime wrote:
> I think the "-C src" in the instructions for sysvinit is not needed:
>
> pkg:~/build/sysvinit-2.88dsf$ cat Makefile
> all install clean distclean:
> $(MAKE) -C src $@
>
> I already built it a few times with just "make" and "make install" and
> it worked.
You're right.
James Robertson wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 5:21 PM, Andrew Benton wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 16:00:38 -0600
>> Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>>
>>> My proposal is to just skip 'arch' completely as I do not believe it is
>>> not used anywhere
Matt Burgess wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-03-05 at 16:59 -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>> Matt Burgess wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2012-03-05 at 16:00 -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>>>
>>>> My proposal is to just skip 'arch' completely as I do not believe it is
>>
Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
> On 3/2/12 11:10 AM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>>> --- binutils-build-sysroot-libdir/ld/eelf_x86_64.c 2012-03-01
>>> 23:31:31.789317951 -0500
>>> +++ binutils-build-nosysroot-nolibdir/ld/eelf_x86_64.c 2012-03-02
>>> 00:29:16.1176973
Ragnar Thomsen wrote:
> We're down to under 100 active tickets for BLFS now!
>
> I have continued my review of the tickets and suggest we resolve the
> following tickets as invalid:
>
> 2333 (5 yr old): MythTV: DVR application.
OK for wontfix
> 3262 (3 mnths old): Cronie, another cron alternati
Ragnar Thomsen wrote:
> Should libssh be added to the book?
>
> I can see that certain packages (cURL, kde-runtime...) can utilize it.
>
> If yes, should we include libssh or libssh2?
>
> This page sheds som light on the differences:
>
> http://www.libssh2.org/libssh2-vs-libssh.html
If we
Lemon Lime wrote:
> Seeing that some packages in LFS require pkg-config to build,
Nothing *requires* pkg-config. It can always be worked around with the
appropriate environment variables. After all, that's what it does: set
appropriate environment variables.
The reason we dropped pkg-config
Qrux wrote:
> Howdy.
>
> In trying to build LFS-7.0 with LFS-7.0, I'm getting this error:
>
> FAIL: test-readlink (exit: 134) ===
>
> test-readlink.h:41: assertion failed
>
> It seems to be a fairly well-known issue:
>
> http://old.nabble.com/test-readlink-failure-t
Qrux wrote:
> Bruce, et al, was the 7.1-release built from 7.0-release on bare-metal? VM?
> Non-LFS host?
My particular 7.1 system was built on 7.0 with a 3.0.4 kernel, but
others built it from different base systems.
-- Bruce
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ:
Qrux wrote:
> On Mar 10, 2012, at 7:29 AM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>
>> Qrux wrote:
>>
>>> Bruce, et al, was the 7.1-release built from 7.0-release on bare-metal?
>>> VM? Non-LFS host?
>> My particular 7.1 system was built on 7.0 with a 3.0.4 kernel, b
Matt Burgess wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-03-02 at 00:39 +, Andrew Benton wrote:
>> On Sat, 25 Feb 2012 19:40:49 +
>> Matt Burgess wrote:
>>
>>> Andy hit issues that were discussed in the thread starting at
>>> http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/pipermail/lfs-dev/2011-March/064617.html
>>>
>>> When
Andrew Benton wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Mar 2012 15:19:19 +
> Andrew Benton wrote:
>
>> checking dynamic linker characteristics... configure: error: Link tests are
>> not allowed after GCC_NO_EXECUTABLES.
>> make[2]: *** [configure-target-zlib] Error 1
>> make[2]: Leaving directory `/tmp/sources/g
Nathan Coulson wrote:
> S30checkfs, we added
>
> # If any LVM based partitions are on the system, ensure they
> # are activated so they can be checked/used.
> if [ -x /sbin/vgchange ]; then
> /sbin/vgchange -a y >/dev/null
> fi
>
> Normally, I would suggest that w
Qrux wrote:
> IMO, LVM and mdraid should be done super-early (whether embedded in
> some other script or separated into their own). It should go right
> after modules are loaded (S05modules in rcS.d, so maybe S06LVM and
> S06md) for the people doing fancy initramfs boots with modules.
> Started e
Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
> Everyone else, please do review all of the links and posts that Greg
> provided. It was mostly reading those (and bits of the source) as well
> as the tests/experimentation that convinced me that the proposed method
> is solid.
Jeremy,
Matt and I are very reluctant
Andrew Benton wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Mar 2012 16:27:34 +
> Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>
>>Matt and I are very reluctant to change a working implementation.
>> From what we can gather, gcc-4.7/glibc-2.15(?) changes things and will
>> require some LFS changes. We need
Qrux wrote:
> On Mar 17, 2012, at 2:38 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>
>>> Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>>>
>>>> Matt and I are very reluctant to change a working
>>>> implementation. From what we can gather, gcc-4.7/glibc-2.15(?)
>>>> changes t
Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
> On 3/17/12 5:38 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>> Until gcc-4.7 comes out I'm recommending we use the exiting jh branch of
>> lfs and go ahead and put in these changes now with the release candidate
>> packages. Then we can do some jhalfs style builds a
Qrux wrote:
> On Mar 17, 2012, at 2:38 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>
>>> Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>>>
>>>> Matt and I are very reluctant to change a working
>>>> implementation.
>>> ...
>>
> # ip addr show eth0
> 2: eth0: mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast state
> UP qlen 1000
>link/ether 00:1e:4f:f8:00:39 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
>inet 172.16.24.1/24 brd 172.16.24.255 scope global eth0
>inet 172.16.24.2/24 brd 172.16.24.255 scope global secondary eth0
>inet 172.16.24.3/24 brd 1
It looks like glibc-2.15 is about to be released:
http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/glibc/glibc-2.15.tar.xz is in the repository but
I can't find a release announcement yet.
-- Bruce
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the a
Qrux wrote:
> On Mar 22, 2012, at 2:20 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>
>>> # ip addr show eth0
>>> 2: eth0: mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast state
>>> UP qlen 1000
>>> link/ether 00:1e:4f:f8:00:39 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
>>> inet 172.16.24.1/24 brd 172.16
Nathan Coulson wrote:
> Hate posting this after the first fixes were out, but came across one
> more problem. If you are using lvm for swap, the mountfs stop script
> fails to bring down the lvm array's. I fixed this on my local system
> by moving the swap bootscript before mountfs on shutdown.
Andrew Benton wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Mar 2012 21:56:23 +
> Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>
>> It looks like glibc-2.15 is about to be released:
>>
>> http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/glibc/glibc-2.15.tar.xz is in the repository but
>> I can't find a release announcement yet
Jonathan Oksman wrote:
Here's the gpm script I'm using on my box here at home. Hope this helps!
Thanks. Note that it's a little counterproductive to compress a 2K file.
-- Bruce
#!/bin/sh
# Begin gpm
#
# Description
Lemon Lime wrote:
> On 03/24/12 17:36, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>> Nathan Coulson wrote:
>>
>>> What I should actually do on my own build, is break the /var/run
>>> symlink, and have two folders. Then I can see what is actually going
>>> where.
>> That&#x
Nathan Coulson wrote:
> It is created in /etc/init.d/cleanfs on startup
>
> > /var/run/utmp
>
> if grep -q '^utmp:' /etc/group ; then
> chmod 664 /var/run/utmp
> chgrp utmp /var/run/utmp
> fi
I thought I did a grep for that. Thanks for the reminder.
-- B
Cyril LEVIS wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I build on an debian wheezy host.
>
> I get the following error when running
> (http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/stable/chapter05/glibc.html)
>
> lfs@debian:/mnt/lfs/sources/glibc-build$ ../glibc-2.15/configure
> --prefix=/tools --host=$LFS_TGT
> --build=$
801 - 900 of 2772 matches
Mail list logo
