Re: Website

2010-07-28 Thread Dan McGhee
On 07/28/2010 10:36 AM, Bruce Dubbs wrote: > Jeremy Huntwork wrote: > >> On Jul 28, 2010, at 1:07 AM, Bruce Dubbs wrote: >> >>> Section 6.3 discusses PM. It says why we don't have PM in the >>> book. >>> >>> There are six hints on PM. >>> >> These sorts of replies are discouragin

Honing "More Control and Package Users"

2010-08-01 Thread Dan McGhee
This is a continuation of a discussion that began on lfs-support. I think that using the wiki is a great idea *once we have something to put there.* I think that the first thing we need to do is update the hint sans any of the "neat" stuff we've thought about. For example, incorporating the s

Re: Honing "More Control and Package Users"

2010-08-02 Thread Dan McGhee
On 08/01/2010 05:29 PM, Timothy Rice wrote: > No, I'm not currently building a base system. You're correct that we > should focus on updating the hint first. I can probably still contribute > to Part I of the hint, and to the scripts. > > There are three more ideas I want to put out there before we

Re: Honing "More Control and Package Users"

2010-08-02 Thread Dan McGhee
On 08/01/2010 05:29 PM, Timothy Rice wrote: > Well, that has about laid on the table all my thoughts on package users to > date. Opinions? How much should go in the core hint, and how much should > be relegated to an appendix or to an "advanced" section of the wiki? > I forgot about your last

Re: Honing "More Control and Package Users"

2010-08-02 Thread Dan McGhee
On 08/02/2010 10:33 AM, jxa...@verizon.net wrote: >> Aug 2, 2010 10:03:02 AM, Dan wrote: >> >> >> For the sake of this discussion let's assume that basic LFS and a "no >> frills" package users system comprise a "first build." If we update the >> hint properly, then this build should go without a hi

Re: Honing "More Control and Package Users"

2010-08-02 Thread Dan McGhee
On 08/02/2010 12:34 PM, jxa...@verizon.net wrote: > .How do you back out of a problematic installation > to trouble-shoot? Let's say I run into a permissions problem and make install > only partially works and then spits out a bunch of errors. Obviously, the > package > is not fully installed,

Re: Honing "More Control and Package Users"

2010-08-05 Thread Dan McGhee
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

Re: devpts mount options

2011-02-19 Thread Dan McGhee
On 02/18/2011 10:46 PM, Bryan Kadzban wrote: > When doing chapter 6 as a non-root user (package-user hint), pt_chown is > being run due to the options we use to mount $LFS/dev/pts early in > chapter 6. Since it's not installed setuid-root, it doesn't work. > > But it shouldn't be needed; if we cha

[lfs-dev] Returning to LFS--Mail Archives

2013-10-04 Thread Dan McGhee
In adjusting to retiring--yes I'm bragging--I got lazy and didn't stay involved in LFS. After ruining three laptops with Ubuntu because of video drivers, I'm up and running again and want to do an LFS build. I want to build along side Windows 8 and am interested in grub and UEFI. I wanted to

Re: [lfs-dev] Returning to LFS--Mail Archives

2013-10-04 Thread Dan McGhee
On 10/04/2013 12:47 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote: > Dan McGhee wrote: >> In adjusting to retiring--yes I'm bragging--I got lazy and didn't stay >> involved in LFS. After ruining three laptops with Ubuntu because of >> video drivers, I'm up and running again and want

Re: OOo, Xorg7.0 etc etc etc

2006-02-19 Thread Dan McGhee
DJ Lucas wrote: Well, I was successful with jdk-1.5.0_05 build from source and OOo build. Unfortunately, the configure check is broken for BDB in OOo-2.0.1, so I used the internal version without the db4.4 patch. Configure couldn't determine the version string, but I don't imagine that'll be

Re: [lfs-dev] Systemd branch now considered usable

2013-12-21 Thread Dan McGhee
On 12/21/2013 02:55 PM, Armin K. wrote: > Hello there, > > After many months since lfs systemd branch was created, I am pleased to > announce that I consider it being usable for everyone that wants to use it. > > I've managed to add missing bits to the branch today and doing that I've > finished wh