ckage, the
> -I/usr/include/nspr dissapears although it shows up during most of the
> previous package builds - could this be a clue???*
>
Disabling mozilla doesn't disable all nss/nspr using projects, it only
disables mozilla addressbook support for mail merge or something like
that, I
First, thanks to the work so far to all involved.
On Die, 2006-03-14 at 14:59 +1100, Greg Schafer wrote:
> Bryan Kadzban wrote:
> > I've been running Alexander's tests
> > (http://linuxfromscratch.org/pipermail/lfs-dev/2006-March/056159.html)
>
> I agree with Alexander that every userspace heade
Thanks for your comments.
On Die, 2006-03-14 at 13:05 -0500, Bryan Kadzban wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 14, 2006 at 02:10:27PM +0100, J?rg Billeter wrote:
> > a="$(echo -ne '\001')"
> > b="$(echo -ne '\002')"
>
> These can probably be simplified to:
>
> a=$'\001'
> b=$'\002'
Didn't know that, changed.
On Mit, 2006-03-15 at 06:27 +1100, Greg Schafer wrote:
> Jürg Billeter wrote:
>
> > Yes, LLH fails that criteria and it ships with a lot of kernel-only
> > stuff. Based on Jim's script I've written an extended version which
> > removes a lot of headers that sh
On Die, 2006-03-14 at 14:10 +0100, Jürg Billeter wrote:
> * Verify headers with real applications
>Will do a full distro (800 packages) recompilation with these headers
> sometime this week and fix headers resp. applications as necessary
Short preliminary report after rebuilding
On Die, 2006-03-14 at 13:27 -0800, Jim Gifford wrote:
> Jürg Billeter wrote:
> > On Die, 2006-03-14 at 14:10 +0100, Jürg Billeter wrote:
> >
> > Short preliminary report after rebuilding the base system (about 240
> > packages). Following problems found so far:
> &
On Mit, 2006-03-15 at 09:11 +1100, Greg Schafer wrote:
> Jürg Billeter wrote:
>
> > Very short rationale is given on top of each file group. Detailed
> > rationale for each header would unfortunately be too time consuming.
>
> Hmmm, that's not ideal. I'm assumin
On Die, 2006-03-14 at 21:49 -0600, DJ Lucas wrote:
> Jürg. I haven't really looked into it, other than a grep through glibc
> source, but would it be acceptable to replace these headers with
> something like the following (example taken from llh linux/socket.h):
>
>
On Mit, 2006-03-15 at 20:02 +, Matthew Burgess wrote:
> Unfortunately, as Jurg points out earlier in this thread, there are
> plenty of headers that are missing those guards and I'm not entirely
> sure that such guards are a complete solution (if they were I don't
> think all the hairy looki
On Mit, 2006-03-15 at 21:06 +, Ken Moffat wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Mar 2006, Roger Blake wrote:
>
> > Although the script might be a good *short term* plan I think an adequate
> > long term solution requires a complete evaluation of *each* header -
> > identifying what code to delete or include.
On Don, 2006-03-16 at 00:41 +0100, Jörg W Mittag wrote:
> Jim Gifford wrote:
> > Some type of userspace setup is planned for 2.7, just no details at this
> > time.
>
> Could you give some more specifics on that? I, too, remeber that
> there was indeed something planned for 2.7, but that was waaa
On Die, 2006-03-14 at 22:01 +0100, Jürg Billeter wrote:
> On Die, 2006-03-14 at 14:10 +0100, Jürg Billeter wrote:
> > * Verify headers with real applications
> >Will do a full distro (800 packages) recompilation with these headers
> > sometime this week and fix headers
On Sam, 2006-03-18 at 08:50 +1100, Greg Schafer wrote:
> Jürg Billeter wrote:
> > * headers-list: Sorted list of all found header references
> > * headers-xref: Header list cross-referenced to the package names
> > (useful to exclude header references of kernel modu
On Sam, 2006-03-18 at 08:56 +0500, Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
> Jürg Billeter wrote:
>
> > - asterisk: Uses linux/compiler.h, include line could just be removed as
> > linux/ixjuser.h doesn't need the compiler.h defines due to the seds we
> > apply to the header
On Sam, 2006-03-18 at 16:10 +, Ken Moffat wrote:
> On Sat, 18 Mar 2006, Jrg Billeter wrote:
>
> > On Sam, 2006-03-18 at 08:56 +0500, Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
> >> Then better make linux/compiler.h an empty file.
> >
> > If you want to go for best compatibility, sure; I currently aim to get
On Fre, 2006-03-17 at 23:37 -0600, DJ Lucas wrote:
> Using the above notes, I've added the following to Jürg's version of the
> script so to create the 'compatibility' headers. Of course these
> could be created once and be copied too...just figured I'd add to the
> script so no local files m
On Sam, 2006-03-18 at 08:24 -0500, Bryan Kadzban wrote:
> DJ Lucas wrote:
> > for FILE in `echo
> > linux/{acct.h,quota.h,resource.h,socket.h,stat.h,time.h,timex.h,un.h,wait.h}`
>
> Er, hang on here -- why are the echo and the backquotes in there? (I
> should note that they're in Jürg's script a
On Sam, 2006-03-18 at 19:22 +, Ken Moffat wrote:
> On Sat, 18 Mar 2006, Jrg Billeter wrote:
>
> > Could you post the error message? What exact header set did you use?
> > Just removing linux/compiler.h without removal of compiler.h references
> > and the correct seds for __user etc. is likely
On Son, 2006-03-19 at 00:31 +, Andrew Benton wrote:
> Jürg Billeter wrote:
> > I've integrated most of your changes and put it online at
> > http://www.paldo.org/headers/linux-glibc-headers-20060318
> > I changed the error messages in linux/compiler.h and linux/c
On Son, 2006-03-19 at 12:28 -0600, DJ Lucas wrote:
> Jürg Billeter wrote:
> >
> > Yes, as I've written before, iproute2 is one of the problematic
> > packages. Besides fixing the includes[1] you need to remove the local
> > copy of the not sanitized kernel hea
On Fre, 2006-04-07 at 16:48 -0500, Randy McMurchy wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-04-07 at 14:40 -0700, Dan Nicholson wrote:
>
> > In that case, I'm guessing fam (gamin) is providing the notification.
>
> This is a good discussion, I am going to learn something here. It was
> my understanding that the File
On Fre, 2006-04-07 at 23:09 +0100, Andrew Benton wrote:
> Dan Nicholson wrote:
> > Probably having newer kernel headers. From gnome-vfs configure, it
> > checks for linux/inotify.h or sys/inotify.h (from glibc-2.3.90+) to
> > enable inotify. This is what I got with l-l-h-2.6.12.0 and
> > glibc-2.
On Fre, 2006-04-07 at 17:22 -0500, Randy McMurchy wrote:
> On Sat, 2006-04-08 at 00:14 +0200, Jürg Billeter wrote:
>
> > It's the other way round. udev notifies HAL of new devices, older HAL
> > versions call fstab-sync to create fstab entries on demand and
> > the /
On Die, 2006-05-30 at 12:02 -0700, Jim Gifford wrote:
> The one thing I've realize working on this is that, not everything in
> the headers will work out of the box, good example is the paging size
> stuff, that requires a glibc function to get it done right. If depends
> on the config.h that is
On Mon, 2006-09-25 at 21:35 +0100, Matthew Burgess wrote:
> Jim Gifford wrote:
>
> > the bottom line is that there will be some major breakages from the
> > headers_install, are you ready to tackle those?
>
> As Dan and I (at least) have previously stated, yes, we're prepared to
> tackle any BL
On Sam, 2007-01-13 at 18:29 -0600, Randy McMurchy wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm fairly certain that Dan can answer this, but putting it out on list
> anyway. I noticed that the GDM instructions include PAM ConsoleHelper
> as a dependency but it doesn't have a URL. If I remember correctly, it
> is a Red
On Don, 2005-03-24 at 19:53 +0100, Edwin van Vliet wrote:
> While installing LFS (development version) I have been reading the
> mailing lists, and repeatedly bumped into remarks which imply that LFS
> should be guided toward being an LSB compliant installation.
>
> Since I have recently install
On Don, 2005-03-24 at 16:44 -0700, Nathan Coulson wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 19:53:02 +0100, Edwin van Vliet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > More questions: the LSB specifications mention "facilities" like
> > $local_fs and $network, but is not very clear on the implementation of
> > it all. I hav
On Fre, 2005-03-25 at 15:31 +0100, Edwin van Vliet wrote:
> The directories with symbolic links look like a plan to me, but I have
> also been thinking of a set of configuration files, e.g.:
>
> $ cat /etc/rc.d/rc.sysinit
> start mountkernfs
> start udev
> start swap
> start $local_fs
> .
On Sam, 2005-04-02 at 08:55 +0100, Matthew Burgess wrote:
> Greg Schafer wrote:
>
> > In case anyone is interested, I have a GCC4 based build working really
> > well.
>
> Did they get the fixincludes in there to allow building from a host with
> a stock glibc-2.3.4 install on it - i.e. they fix
On Don, 2005-04-14 at 14:08 -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Just to try it out, I donloaded a copy of Acrobat Reader 7 for Linux and
> installed it. On my LFS 6.1 testing system it flashes the splash screen
> and exits without any error messages of any kind.
>
> ldd on the binary does not show any
em with gcc 4.0.1, GNOME
2.10, and OpenOffice.org 2.0 m116, works nice...
Regards,
Jürg
--
Jürg Billeter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
eople of copying just because they got the
same idea or did similar research. You're not the only one doing some
research.
BTW: I've asked Ryan why he didn't use the simpler build method and IIRC
he replied that he wants to keep the compatibility with older toolchains
that don't sup
you can get it from beaglewiki.org
HTH,
Jürg
--
Jürg Billeter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
releases ago.
> As for the input susbystem calling /sbin/hotplug directly and not
> duplicating events on the netlink socket, that's OK if you don't rely
> upon input module autoloading (e.g. for psmouse).
Maybe this even gets fixed some time ;)
Regards,
Jürg
--
On Die, 2005-08-16 at 20:31 +0100, Matthew Burgess wrote:
> Jürg Billeter wrote:
> > If you're (or anybode else is) interested in this topic, I could explain
> > our approach - simplified since event recorder got upstream.
>
> Yep, I'd be interested, though
lems so far.
BTW: The modular/monolithic decision will be irrelevant for future
releases as 6.9 will be the last monolithic release.
Jürg
--
Jürg Billeter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
On Mit, 2005-08-31 at 22:17 +0100, Andrew Benton wrote:
> Jürg Billeter wrote:
> > BTW: The modular/monolithic decision will be irrelevant for future
> > releases as 6.9 will be the last monolithic release.
> >
>
> I've not been keeping up with this at a
nwise to test with current 4.0 (or maybe also
4.1) snapshot as it may already have been fixed. Will test that
afterwards and maybe try to create a testcase.
Regards,
Jürg
--
Jürg Billeter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
gt; >branches/gcc4/BOOK/chapter06/util-linux.xml
> > Log:
> > Correct the util-linux segfault fix
> >
> > -sed -i 's/-O2/-O/' MCONFIG
> > +sed -i 's/-O2/-O/' configure
Btw, why do you sed at all? "CFLAGS=-O ./configure" works fine her
On Sam, 2005-09-03 at 08:24 +0200, Jürg Billeter wrote:
> Maybe it wouldn't be that unwise to test with current 4.0 (or maybe also
> 4.1) snapshot as it may already have been fixed. Will test that
4.0-20050901 and 4.1-20050902 are still affected.
--
Jürg Billeter <[EMAIL PROTEC
On Sam, 2005-09-03 at 08:24 +0200, Jürg Billeter wrote:
> On Sam, 2005-09-03 at 10:35 +1000, Greg Schafer wrote:
> > Better still, we should just find the bug and fix it. Why pessimize the
> > whole of Util-linux just because of an intermittent bug in cfdisk? It's a
> > b
On Sam, 2005-09-03 at 18:53 +1000, Greg Schafer wrote:
> On Sat, 03 Sep 2005 10:37:30 +0200, Jürg Billeter wrote:
>
> > Ok, it's not a gcc bug at all... The SEGV seems to have destroyed some
> > debug info on the stack and that's the reason gdb didn't help. The
&
On Sam, 2005-09-03 at 05:26 -0400, Chris Staub wrote:
> >>On Sat, 03 Sep 2005 10:37:30 +0200, Jürg Billeter wrote:
> >>
> >>>Ok, it's not a gcc bug at all... The SEGV seems to have destroyed some
> >>>debug info on the stack and that's the rea
> >
> If we do this, we could remove chroot from the Cross-LFS, since it's
> only there for same arch to same arch capability.
What about cross-build on cpus that support multiple archs? (e.g. x86
<-> x86_64, x86 <-> IA64, ...)
Jürg
--
Jürg Billeter <[EMAIL PROTEC
st two problems with udev/hotplug :(
Yes, that's the same problem. Alexander's solution is the more general
way.
Jürg
--
Jürg Billeter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
resp. package versions are
not in BLFS but might well be in the future.
Jürg
--
Jürg Billeter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
of
seconds and it normally doesn't need that much power while being
suspended (less than .5 W). The only disadvantage from my perspective is
that not all laptops are supported - hence that's a crucial factor when
buying one.
Regards,
Jürg
--
Jürg Billeter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
is probably wrong in the BLFS
> setup of not using the managed keyword in the auto-fstab entries.
util-linux added support for the comment keyword some versions ago. So I
just replace "managed" by "comment=managed" in 10-storage-policy.fdi and
that seems to work fine.
Jürg
27;t suffice to get an inotify-enabled glibc. The new
syscalls are still missing. My patch [1] does this for x86 and x86_64.
Regards,
Jürg
[1]
http://www.paldo.org/paldo/sources/linux-libc-headers/linux-libc-headers-20051121-inotify-1.patch.bz2
--
Jürg Billeter <[EMAIL PRO
50 matches
Mail list logo
