hough so that I can
see the same tongiht while I'm redoing the few gnome peices anyway.
-- DJ Lucas
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Randy McMurchy wrote:
> DJ Lucas wrote these words on 08/28/05 23:57 CST:
>
>
>>Basically, the symptom is that text consoles are screwed up after
>>starting X, and in some cases (Trident Cyber*) a completely white x
>>display. To reproduce, 'startx' and then
this bug?
http://bugs.linuxfromscratch.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1616
-- DJ Lucas
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
s handle it themselves.
Short version:
Yes, with two assumptions. 1) you've found the cause for __cplusplus
issue. 2) there are no other API changes readily visible. Update it and
patch away (in the appropriate manor) as we find the affected packages.
-- DJ Lucas
--
http://linuxfromsc
in various rules files and any pages
can link back to it when a new rule is needed say in udf-tools (nobody
has mentioned the pktcdvd device yet). I'd even like to go so far as to
mention cdsymlinks{,.sh} and cdromid..but this may be a bit much so
early on. Anyway, it&
it
> seems that zsh isn't the only shell affected by this - ksh was as well.
Unfortunately, I have never tested with ksh ever...but what version and
where to get it from?
>What
> I wanted to ask though is, when I've got the patches working, where do I
> submit them to...he
n configure, that's fixed too. I used gcc-4.0.2 and
> didn't apply any patches to glibc. I just thought you might be interested
Date/Time? :-)
-- DJ Lucas
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
DJ Lucas wrote:
Well, I haven't tried the above patch yet, though judging from what I am
now seeing and the bug report attached to it, this looks like it may
needed. Thanks. It's in my currently running build along with a few
others. My new problem is that the preview in th
tested it yet,
but I like it. Besides that, lfs-bootscripts are not LSB compliant yet.
I was working a lot on those recently, until OOo and JDK updates came
along.
OT: I need to put those LSB scripts up for others to view, but I've only
got about a third of the needed functionality of the
d.devel
...beyond.support
...book
...devel
...general (chat)
...security
...support
gmane.os.freebsd.devel.lfs (obviously not to do with LinuxFromScratch)
-- DJ Lucas
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
don't know what happened with cups...must have accidently deleted it
cause it's in the text copy I was using to rewrite the page. Will get
it put back shortly.
Thanks for the feedback.
-- DJ Lucas
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.
ens. OOo/firefox will be on hold till this is
resolved. If I can see the error, I'll rebuild glibc with the patch and
see what the result is. Actually, the debian or other redhat bug had a
simple test case IIRC...maybe that'll tickle it.
-- DJ Lucas
--
http://linuxfr
which could explain why I do not see the problem. I don't understand
why, but the complete 'fix' as shown in the bug reports, changes only
one line for glibc-2.3.5. sysdeps/generic/dl-tls.c, in line 75, change
the assert to an if. The rest looks to be indentation.
http://bugs
Archaic wrote:
On Sun, Nov 20, 2005 at 12:39:52AM -0600, DJ Lucas wrote:
I couldn't reproduce the problem using the debian supplied testcase.
Did you do the
export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=".:/usr/local/lib:/usr/X11R6/lib:/usr/lib:/lib"
part?
Well, I'm just slightly red faced
DJ Lucas wrote:
Well, I'm just slightly red faced right now. :-) "I'm almost there"
and then all of a sudden I can't test it any more...but it's back again!
Such an obvious oversight. Yes, the problem does exist. I've got
glibc building now.
Th
late for inclusion in the book, that would be bad for BLFS WRT OOo2 and
possibly some issues with Xine, but at least please make mention of it
in the eratta after it's been tested.
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/patches/downloads/glibc/glibc-2.3.4-tls_assert-1.patch
-- DJ Lucas
--
t this is acknowledged and
fixed upstream. OTOH, it looks like BLFS can work arround it if needs
be with an LD_PRELOAD line...It might be a pain to find them, but it can
be done I suppose.
-- DJ Lucas
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
mply should not be fussing about it.
-- DJ Lucas
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Archaic wrote:
On Sun, Nov 20, 2005 at 08:58:03PM +, DJ Lucas wrote:
I think that the deciding factor should be that this is acknowledged
and fixed upstream. OTOH, it looks like BLFS can work arround it if
needs be with an LD_PRELOAD line...It might be a pain to find them,
but it can be
Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
DJ Lucas wrote:
I used jhbuild for my first time last night so as to get at it quick. I
jhbuild? jhalfs maybe? :) Either way, glad you liked it. We're always
looking for suggestions, so feel free to send any to alfs-discuss.
--
JH
OMG sorry about tha
Randy McMurchy wrote:
Hey dude! How about moving that clock up about 6 hours?
Sorry bout that. Chicago was a link to /etc/localtime (which was a link
to itself (ID ten T error)). Thanks for bringing it to my attention.
-- DJ Lucas
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
Matthew Burgess wrote:
DJ Lucas wrote:
Sorry it's so last minute with release scheduled in 6 days, but I'd
suggest testing this patch for inclusion in 6.1.1. I have tested and
verified only on 2.3.5.
I don't have time to test this myself, so I'm going to have to ask
DJ Lucas wrote:
I have not compared the testsuite results
yet. I completely forgot about them, so I've got to rebuild without the
patch again. The patched version tests are running now. Will report
again tomorrow after work.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] src]# grep Error glibc-build/glibc-
uot;purity." A lot of the discovery might lay still
within Ryan/Greg's notes from PLFS too (Thanks again for the eye opener
that still holds true years later). Has anyone looked there recently?
Maybe I ansered a question from my first paragraph above?
-- DJ Lucas
--
http://linuxfromsc
external dvdnav library (why
you would need to I don't know, but you can...).
Then I stand corrected...it should remain, baring our decision to follow
(or not) the recomendation of the developers. libdvdcss OTOH should be
added...I've always just took that for grante
hange)...it had to sit and wait until
the second round of 3.4 fixes (3.4.2) before dropping the heavy gcc-3.3
dep. Although I never tested 4.0.0, 4.0.1 was okay. 4.0.0 would be
interesting to see if the current instructions work when I have some
time to blow.
-- DJ Lucas
--
ment yet. Will be nice to see what to
expect from the testsuite though.
-- DJ Lucas
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
n prefix nowadays. I didn't look at the makefiles to see if
DESTDIR is still supported.
-- DJ Lucas
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
mmended (in the READMEs) way.
I can't possibly agree with that. `touch timestamp && [book
instructions] && find / -newer timestamp` works fine for me,
Hmm...old install-log. Don't forget to single step the result and grep
through the existing ones for a match to
t extract of the emails you've
had, so that we can all read about your previous development? Obviously
you should first ask for permission from any parties involved, but it
would be a big help for everyone to see the when, why, and how behind
the what.
-- DJ Lucas
--
http://linuxfromscrat
he log if found. No need
for a long grep loop (vs. a long test loop for xargs I'd guess).
-- DJ Lucas
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
ke the current boot_mesg
function script in 3.2.{1,2}) because you can't use wc (it might not be
availible as it's in /usr/bin, not to mention it's brokeness with utf8).
The other (and easier) solution is to echo "mounting...", capture output
of mount and grep for the che
s
if yous decide that it should be moved.
Thanks for consideration.
-- DJ Lucas
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
DJ Lucas wrote:
Hey guys, I don't know if LFS will be interested in it or not in the
future, but I've been writing a new set of LSB bootscripts. Per LSB,
nice is required to be in /bin, as it must be used to start processeses
in start_daemon(). It could be lumped into the bootscri
DJ Lucas wrote:
Also, find is used in cleanfs and _must_ be moved to /bin, else the
bootscript needs a rewrite.
And another setfont is used in the console script, which is used before
the network comes up so it cannot be in /usr. All of the above require
no libs in usr according to
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
I was installing the
Java runtime and the included script had:
tail +122 ...
I had to change it to tail -n +122 ...
jdk-*.bin? or in the source tree?
--DJ Lucas
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe
efalt 2.6.12+) randomize_va_space? If so, just turn it off before the
build (either kernel.randomize_va_space "0" in sysctl.conf, or 'echo "0"
> /proc/sys/kernel/randomize_va_space'. If I'm over simplifying this,
then just ignore.
-- DJ Lucas
--
http://li
g was moved out of the standard
scripts. There will still need more changes when 2.6.15 and no
hotplug/udev changes occur.
As far as any official release, Nathan is the person to talk to. He's
not been readily availible lately, IIRC due to telco, but he has been
checking in when possibl
Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
DJ Lucas wrote:
A quick summary of changes: The ghost PIDs (and false already running
messages) have been fixed; boot_mesg() has been greatly simplified
without the text wraping; and logging was moved out of the standard
scripts. There will still need more
S does not allow for
X11R7. :-) BTW, I'll put up the corrected libdrm page in a second.
-- DJ Lucas
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
nge in BDB? No, can't be! ;-) Still FWIW, usually these are
not a big deal, and my preference is the same. Alexander mentioned
another couple of sticking points below that will need to be examined.
-- DJ Lucas
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscr
Thomas Pegg wrote:
DJ Lucas wrote:
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~dj/blfs-xorg7/x/xorg7.html
EXAMPLE ONLY...none of it has been tested at all. It's only there to
show one possible screen/book layout, IMO the most presentable. I'll
beat it into shape over the next few days as
plete
and/or accurate. I'll put up a more recent set if anyone would like to
look at them that accounts for the issues that have been found recently.
Just note, while I have built it that way, I would definately _not_
use them on your box yet.
-- DJ Lucas
--
http://linuxfromscratch.o
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
DJ Lucas wrote:
As far as the book, should it be /usr/X11 and /usr for the optional? It
may be what Sun is doing, but this still isn't FHS compliant. I'm
leaning toward /usr or optionally /opt/X11 (follow KDE and Gnome).
The /usr/X11 is closer to the t
ould stand the
best chance of finding any pitfalls/setbacks/issues/etc. in the proposed
migration plan. At least AFAIK it's the largest, and it has a decent
revision history (for a couple of years before the SVN migration at
least) to drag along with it.
-- DJ Lucas
--
http://linuxfromscr
Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
DJ Lucas wrote:
I trust this is for testing purposes...
This isn't to do with Trac, but Trac benefits by it. We are running
Subversion 1.1, IIRC. And 1.3.0 has been released and we feel it's a
good time to upgrade. If you have a concern with that, pleas
_ so these issues can be found and fixed before
letting them loose into our production environment. I had suggested to
use BLFS for that very reason...it's big and has a better chance of
showing/finding the bugs.
-- DJ Lucas
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lf
Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
DJ Lucas wrote:
The very first (and most annoying) thing I've noticed (that will affect
me) is that the default when clicking on a file in the source browser is
the current revision instead of revision history. That will just drive
me batty!
Heh, that'
this thread, in the past Mariusz has
been very receptive to patches.
I have copied both the LFS-DEV list and Cross-LFS list, this has been a
topic of some questions both in these lists and in IRC
(yes I know, that's why I'm posting this message)
-- DJ Lucas
--
http://linuxfromsc
Greg Schafer wrote:
For the record, it seems Mariusz Mazur is not completely MIA. His blog was
updated only a few days ago:
http://mmazur.name/
Doesn't look too far away to me. From the website:
Next release of llh ยท January 22, 2006
I will finish working on 2.6.14.0 and start working
Bryan Kadzban wrote:
DJ Lucas wrote:
What are the known issues agains the released version/cvs? What's
been done so far?
If you mean "what are the known issues against the released llh package"
(not the kernel headers themselves), I'd really like to know that to
501 - 551 of 551 matches
Mail list logo
