Hello,
I have subscribed this list recently, so let me introduce myself:
My name is Pierre Labastie. I have been practicing linux system building
as a hobby for quite a while: I think my first attempts (with Linux From
Scratch) were undertaken in 2003. Time passing, I switched to DIY linux,
to
Le 28/12/2011 13:27, Matt Burgess a écrit :
> On Wed, 2011-12-28 at 13:09 +0100, Pierre Labastie wrote:
>
>> So, `version-check.sh' outputs (among other things...):
>> version-check.sh: line 22: /lib/libc.so.6: No such file or directory
>>
>> Actually, cur
Le 29/12/2011 22:53, Matt Burgess a écrit :
> On Thu, 2011-12-29 at 13:39 -0800, Bryan Kadzban wrote:
>
>> ldd /bin/ls | awk '/libc\.so/ {print $3;}'
> That's really neat. Works on a Fedora 64-bit host and an up to date
> lfs-trunk build as well. I'll add it to the book in a few days in case
> so
ids. :-/
>>
>> Matthew Burgess wrote:
>>> On Wed, 2011-12-28 at 15:01 +0100, Pierre Labastie wrote:
>>>
>>>> I meant `current trunk' too. The change in version 3537 is not enough.
>>>> Here is what I have done (not checked on any other syste
Le 30/12/2011 08:46, Alex a écrit :
> I tried using it myself and saw odd behavior when using sysroot with a
> native gcc. The library search path ended up being /SYSROOT/ABSOLUTE/lib/
> instead of /SYSROOT/lib when the 'lib' directory was located at
> /ABSOLUTE/lib. I added a 'hack' syml
Le 06/01/2012 04:49, Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
> I'm sure whatever you choose to do is perfectly fine for your needs, but
> objecting to parameter substitution as being more complicated than piping to
> head and then cut is silly. It's simple pattern substitution like you do with
> sed in the rest
Hi,
In the book sources retrieved from the subversion repository,
there is a Makefile, which has non POSIX constructs, e.g.:
$(Q)rm -f $(RENDERTMP)/lfs-{full,html,pdf}.xml # no {} in POSIX
or
$(Q)if [ "x$(MAKETAR)" == "x" ]; then # no == in POSIX. use
simple '='
Le 07/01/2012 18:47, Bruce Dubbs a écrit :
> Pierre Labastie wrote:
>> Would it be possible to add SHELL = /bin/bash in the
>> header of the Makefile ? (same in BLFS and HLFS). the git
>> CLFS Makefile has the line SHELL=/bin/bash
> I did that for LFS/BLFS. I do
Le 15/01/2012 13:48, Matt Burgess a écrit :
> "The rules to create persistent network interface and cdrom link
> rules automatically in /etc/udev/rules.d/ have been disabled by
> default. Explicit configuration will be required for these use
> cases, udev will no longer try to write any persistent
Hi,
Regarding the "posix/bug-regex32"error in glibc tests, I found
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13118
Maintainer says he has applied the patch, but I checked that Glibc-2.14.1
tarball still lacks the correction.
Not sure it is worth considering including the patch (or adding a
Hi,
As the subject heading says, it looks like kmod.xml is missing in rev 9712,
while chapter06/chapter06.xml has been modified to "xinclude" it.
Regards,
Pierre
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above informa
Hi,
In packages.ent, the line:
should be:
Regards
Pierre
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Hi,
I wonder if anybody still uses jhalfs, and if he(she) has tried ICA
lately.
ICA is broken because of the part in glibc's instructions, which
instructs 'test-installation.pl' to look for /usr/lib rather than
/tools/lib. On the second (and following) pass, the line 'DL=...' sets
DL to empty (bec
Le 26/01/2012 19:10, Ken Moffat a ecrit :
> On Thu, Jan 26, 2012 at 06:27:04PM +0100, Pierre Labastie wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I wonder if anybody still uses jhalfs, and if he(she) has tried ICA
>> lately.
> I gave up on my own version of ICA ('farce') years a
Hi,
I think I spotted something by doing ICA (not all investigated yet).
ld.so.cache differs at the end of pass 1 and at the end of pass 2.
It can be printed with ldconfig -p, and then diffed, which gives:
--- ld.so.cache-1 2012-01-27 19:19:13.0 +0100
+++ ld.so.cache-2 2012-01
Le 27/01/2012 19:46, Bruce Dubbs a écrit :
>
> Pierre Labastie wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I think I spotted something by doing ICA (not all investigated yet).
>> ld.so.cache differs at the end of pass 1 and at the end of pass 2.
>> It can be printed with ldcon
Le 28/01/2012 00:01, Matt Burgess a écrit :
>
> OK, so running ldconfig just after pass2 should fix things up then, do
> you think?
>
Oh, I should not have used pass 1, 2: I meant the ICA passes.
Let us call them 'build'.
Running ldconfig at the end of build 1 (Section 6.64 - Cleaning Up,
for exa
Hi,
Maybe another thing to worry about:
--
--- iteration-1/usr/lib/libgmpxx.la
+++ iteration-2/usr/lib/libgmpxx.la
@@ -17,7 +17,7 @@
inherited_linker_flags=''
# Libraries that this one depends upon.
-dependency_libs=' /usr/lib/libgmp.la'
+dependency
Le 28/01/2012 00:30, Bruce Dubbs a écrit :
> Pierre Labastie wrote:
>> Well, the reason why grub does not find liblzma is much simpler
>> anyway: grub is built before xz!
>
> It should find xz from Chapter 5. The liblzma.so.5.0.3 is in /tools and
> it does have the lzma_c
Le 28/01/2012 12:34, Matt Burgess a écrit :
> On Thu, 2012-01-26 at 19:15 -0500, Thomas Pegg wrote:
>
>> I noticed the patch too but haven't had time to thoroughly review it
>> yet. But I would say before it does get applied a new stable release of
>> jhalfs as there have been a few fixes since the
Le 03/02/2012 06:04, Bryan Kadzban a écrit :
> But this is it:
>
>> # ignore KVM virtual interfaces
>> ENV{MATCHADDR}=="52:54:00:*", GOTO="persistent_net_generator_end"
>
> (From /lib/udev/rules.d/75-persistent-net-generator.rules.)
It might not work on real hardware machines under Fedora 16:
Becau
Hi,
I already reported that ICA iteration 1 and 2 did not
have the same libgmpxx.so.4.2.3. I have investigated
a little more.
Maybe I should recall what ICA is:
-First build as per chapter 6 instructions.
-Remove /tools, copy the / hierarchy into some directory, say iteration1
-then start again Th
Le 04/02/2012 21:30, Pierre Labastie a écrit :
> maybe link libstdc++ to this directory, something like:
> ln -s /tools/lib/libstdc++.a `dirname $(gcc
> --print-libgcc-file-name)`/libstdc++.a
> could be added to the "readjusting" instructions. After doing that,
> gmp&
Le 04/02/2012 22:33, Bryan Kadzban a écrit :
>
> Bah, right. Well, there's a C++ compiler *somewhere*, that the pass2
> gcc is using to compile libstdc++ when it runs into this error. :-)
>
> Maybe it'd be a better idea to do it that way: Run a build until it
> breaks, then repeat the command tha
Le 05/02/2012 12:36, Pierre Labastie a écrit :
> Le 04/02/2012 22:33, Bryan Kadzban a écrit :
>> Bah, right. Well, there's a C++ compiler *somewhere*, that the pass2
>> gcc is using to compile libstdc++ when it runs into this error. :-)
>>
>> Maybe it'd be a
Le 05/02/2012 16:44, Andrew Benton a écrit :
> On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 12:46:24 +0100
> Pierre Labastie wrote:
>
>>> Maybe try (supposing the build tree has not been removed):
>>>
>>> echo '#include' |/mnt/lfs/sources/gcc-build/gcc/xgcc -shared-libg
Le 05/02/2012 18:02, Andrew Benton a écrit :
> On Sat, 04 Feb 2012 23:00:37 +0100
> Pierre Labastie wrote:
>
>> Looks like the libstdc++.a built during chapter 5 cannot be used...
>> Some missing -fPIC during build of libstdc++?
>> (-fPIC is indeed used for C++ bindi
Le 06/02/2012 00:32, Andrew Benton a écrit :
> On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 23:01:30 +0100
> Pierre Labastie wrote:
>
>> If I understand the xxx.la files, they are used by libtool to find
>> libraries. I am certainly missing something, but I do not understand
>> why changing t
Le 05/02/2012 20:16, Bruce Dubbs a écrit :
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://wik
Le 05/02/2012 20:16, Bruce Dubbs a écrit :
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://wik
Le 05/02/2012 20:16, Bruce Dubbs a écrit :
> 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.
>
>
Le 17/02/2012 18:30, Bruce Dubbs a écrit :
> 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 i
Le 17/02/2012 23:08, Thomas Pegg a écrit :
> After looking at this all that is needed is to add the following line
> to common/libs/func_book_parser right after we check out the sources.
>
> cd ${PROGNAME}-$LFSVRS; bash process-scripts.sh>> $LOGDIR/$LOG 2>&1 ; cd ..
>
> This quells all those messa
Le 17/02/2012 23:19, Bruce Dubbs a écrit :
> 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 &
Le 18/02/2012 00:49, Matt Burgess a écrit :
>
> I'm not sure your fix is right though. Being a pedant, the last 2
> commands in the validxml target have nothing to do with validating the
> XML; that is obviously achieved by the call to xmllint. Then again,
> those last 2 commands are required in o
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 from LFS-7.0 to
> 20 packages as well as fixes to
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. [...]
>> Hi,
>> Looks like since 7.0, the sv
Hi,
I have done a test of LFS-7.1-rc1. ICA went OK, except the
already reported problem with ld.so.cache (ldconfig still missing
somewhere), which is not a big issue. In case somebody else
does ICA, there is this difference in etip.h between ICA
iterations 1 and 2:
Le 21/02/2012 21:51, Andrew Benton a écrit :
> On Tue, 21 Feb 2012 09:47:00 +0100
> Pierre Labastie wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have done a test of LFS-7.1-rc1. ICA went OK, except the
>> already reported problem with ld.so.cache (ldconfig still missing
>> s
Hi,
I have read several times that some of you were using DESTDIR
and recording the installed files for being able to uninstall
packages. I recently realized that what I have called `package
management' in jhalfs could be used for that purpose:
basically it automates the generation of scriptlets w
Le 23/02/2012 16:29, Thomas Pegg a écrit :
> On Feb 23, 2012, at 8:30 AM, Pierre Labastie wrote:
>
>> I think this function could be used for recording the
>> installed files.
> There is actually already functionality in jhalfs to do that already, Cant
> remember whic
Hi,
I have seen several discussions about the new build method
proposed by Jeremy.;-)
For myself, I have no idea, although I like this method because
I tried to implement it myself (and not succeeded because I
took a wrong path).
One crucial point always with a novelty is "does it work?"
Of course
Le 03/03/2012 08:22, Qrux a écrit :
>
> I spent a little time with jhalfs in 6.8. I had some trouble with the build
> (I'm sure it was me, or an outdated host). It's very pretty, and I might try
> a similar menuconfig-style-interface in my own stuff. Right now I just use
> 'read VAR' for my s
Le 06/03/2012 20:03, Bruce Dubbs a écrit :
> Pierre Labastie wrote:
>> Actually the instructions in the book for wget have a
>> configure switch '--with-ssl=openssl', while openssl
>> is optional. Furthermore, the "command explanations"
>> say
Coming to what is needed for automating the book (I do
not mean automating the building of a system, but rather
being able to automate testing), one thing which is
really hard to deal with is the fact that there are several
(sometimes incompatible) options on the same footing
in the instructions.
Le 09/03/2012 14:53, Qrux a écrit :
> Howdy.
>
> In trying to build LFS-7.0 with LFS-7.0, I'm getting this error:
>
> FAIL: test-readlink (exit: 134)
> ===
> [...]
> OOH, it doesn't appear to be a "huge issue", so the sed is nice...OTOH, it's
> still a red f
Le 09/03/2012 14:53, Qrux a écrit :
> 1) Does anyone else see this in either 7.0 or 7.1 when building LFS from
> their host platform?
no
> 2) Does anyone see this when building 7.0 (or 7.1) from 7.0?
not tried
> 3) Does anyone see this when building 7.1 from 7.1?
no. I just tried buiding m4 from 7
Le 10/03/2012 02:32, Qrux a écrit :
> Thanks for all the responses (I'm still looking through some info Pierre sent
> me).
>
>@Pierre: I'm talking about *testing* m4 (in Chap 6). If you're using
> openSUSE-12.1, you should see this error if you run the tests for m4--I did.
>
Sorry, I really
Le 10/03/2012 09:57, Pierre Labastie a écrit :
> Sorry, I really meant the tests pass. I didn't send the
> not-so-informative result of the test:
> PASS: test-readlink.
>
> Whatever I do, I never see an error. Even with the 3.2.6 kernel built
> with LFS. I used 7.1, bu
Hi,
In chapter06/gcc.xml, there is an extraspace at the
end of the line --enable-threads=posix \ . This makes
configure start right after that line when copying and pasting,
without reading the other options.
Regards
Pierre
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://ww
Le 12/03/2012 10:18, Andrew Benton a écrit :
> On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 00:31:41 +
> Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
>
>>> On Fri, 2012-03-02 at 00:39 +, Andrew Benton wrote:
>>> I'm still no nearer to figuring out why I get this error. Trying to
>>> follow Jeremy's new newlib build method fails for me
compiler. So where we would normally need the --disable-bootstrap
>> switch, we don't here, but the effect is the same.
> Indeed. Adding --disable-bootstrap had no effect, it failed in the same
> way. The cross_compile.patch works though.
>
>> Pierre Labastie wrote:
&
Le 12/03/2012 15:07, Andrew Benton a écrit :
> The --disable-target-zlib and --disable-target-libiberty patch is what
> we're discussing here. Jeremy says he can compile without it.
>
> Andy
I can compile without it too. But I do not have the logs anymore.
I looked at logs obtained with the patch.
Le 12/03/2012 15:07, Andrew Benton a écrit :
> The --disable-target-zlib and --disable-target-libiberty patch is what
> we're discussing here. Jeremy says he can compile without it.
>
> Andy
I've run binutils/gcc-pass1 following Jeremy's patch, with gcc-4.6.3,
so without --disable-target-*.
It com
Le 13/03/2012 03:44, Jeremy Huntwork a écrit :
>
> I'm not sure what you're doing differently, but I can't replicate.
>
> JH
Maybe, what you could do is exchange your logs and diff them?
Or send it both to me, and I'll try to diff them sometime today.
This is useful only if you have not used make -
Le 13/03/2012 16:18, Andrew Benton a écrit :
>
> I was unwilling to use jhalfs as I dislike sudo. However, needs must,
> and the result?
> [...]
> This was using Jeremy's sysroot.diff on top of the LFS xml files. I
> think vanilla LFS will work for me as it has the patch and
> --disable-target-zlib
Le 13/03/2012 20:14, Bruce Dubbs a ecrit:
> - if [ "$2" == "lib" ]; then
> -file=$(PATH=/lib:/usr/lib type -p $1)
> + if [ "$2" = "lib" ]; then
> +file=$(find /lib /usr/lib -maxdepth 1 -name $1 | head -n 1)
> else
> -file=$(type -p $1)
> +file=$(find /bin /usr/bin /sbin /usr/
Le 14/03/2012 03:02, Andrew Benton a écrit :
> On Tue, 13 Mar 2012 22:37:30 +
> "Gilles Espinasse" wrote:
>
>> - Original Message -
>> From: "Andrew Benton"
>> To:
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2012 11:00 PM
>> Subject: Re: [lfs-dev] gcc cross patch in pass1
>>
>>
>>> On Tue, 13 Mar 2012
Le 15/03/2012 04:32, Bryan Kadzban a écrit :
> Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
>> On 3/8/12 4:24 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>>> Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
On 3/2/12 11:10 AM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Yes, I saw that. Reviewing.
How is that coming along?
>>> Not well, sorry. I've got some personal things
Le 16/03/2012 07:45, Bryan Kadzban a écrit :
> Pierre Labastie wrote:
>> Le 15/03/2012 04:32, Bryan Kadzban a écrit :
>>> This may have been covered in this thread already, but I don't
>>> recall anymore -- did you do an ICA run with this change?
>> I have
Le 18/03/2012 23:56, Bryan Kadzban a écrit :
>
>> I am not sure I fully understand this story of relocation data...
> I'd have to guess different flags sent to the linker. As for *why*
> those flags are being sent differently... no idea yet. :-) I should
> get some hardware and start rebuilding
Le 20/03/2012 05:24, Bryan Kadzban a écrit :
> That's weird. There are no differences in the strip binaries (when you
> do strip the libraries), right? Or in libbfd.so.whatever-it-is?
Actually, in the book, the binaries in {,/usr}{/bin,/sbin} are stripped,
and the
libraries in {,/usr}lib from de
Le 20/03/2012 22:53, g@free.fr a écrit :
> Would not using something like
> export GZIP='-n'
> solve the include timestamp issue?
>
> Gilles
Well, anyway, unzipping files allows to compare them more easily.
And I think it would not be safe to change book instructions just for the
purpose of doi
Le 22/03/2012 22:43, Thierry Nuttens a écrit :
> Hello,
>
> I'm facing some trouble which I could partially solved but pass1 glibc 2.15
> is not compiling successfully. Any idea
>
>
> GNU C (GCC) version 4.7.0 (x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu)
> compiled by GNU C version 4.6.3, GMP version 5.0.4, MPFR
Le 23/03/2012 12:09, Thierry Nuttens a écrit :
>Anyway install_root=/tools should have been install_root=$LFS in fact.
Actually, this is the correct way to cross-compile a package:
Use a cross-compiler (binutils-pass1+gcc-pass1) and install the package
to a place
where it can be transferred t
Hi,
Successful build up to gcc-pass2 as per Jeremy's new build method,
gcc-4.7+glibc-2.15:
1- I have tried the new gcc-4.7 configure switch
--with-native-system-header-dir=/tools/include
to both passes of gcc, and totally suppressed the
instructions about INCLUDE and HEADER files or dirs.
2- Ne
Hi,
I've tried the last svn version on my old pentium-m
laptop.
1- The error:
/mnt/lfs/sources/libc-build/math/s_frexp.os.dt -MT
/mnt/lfs/sources/libc-build/math/s_frexp.os
./sysdeps/i386/fpu/s_frexp.S: Assembler messages:
./sysdeps/i386/fpu/s_frexp.S:66: Error: invalid identifier for ".ifdef"
Le 27/03/2012 15:12, Matthew Burgess a écrit :
>> 2- When building without optimization (noOpt in jhalfs), there is an error
>>
>> "glibc cannot be built without optimization"
> Is this a regression from Glibc-2.14.1? It certainly sounds like an explicit
> decision from upstream.
Well, I have to t
Le 27/03/2012 22:23, Matt Burgess a écrit :
> On Tue, 2012-03-27 at 18:47 +0200, Pierre Labastie wrote:
>> Well, I have to test again and my 32 bit computer is slow (I never built
>> glibc
>> with noOpt before). Will tell tomorrow...
> A quick grep of the sources suggests y
Matt,
Thanks for the quick fixes.
Looks like you have included instructions for downloading the glibc
patch, but it seems that it is not included in the instructions of glibc
(chapter 5 at least, not looked at chapter 6).
Regards,
Pierre
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
F
Hi,
The binutils patch in chapter05/binutils-pass{1,2} should be applied
before changing directory
to binutils-build:-) . Chapter06/binutils is OK.
Regards,
Pierre
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above infor
Le 28/03/2012 10:32, Matthew Burgess a écrit :
> On Wed, 28 Mar 2012 10:23:57 +0200, Pierre Labastie
> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> The binutils patch in chapter05/binutils-pass{1,2} should be applied
>> before changing directory to binutils-build:-) . Chapter06/binutils is
Le 27/03/2012 18:47, Pierre Labastie a écrit :
> Le 27/03/2012 15:12, Matthew Burgess a écrit :
>>> 2- When building without optimization (noOpt in jhalfs), there is an error
>>>
>>> "glibc cannot be built without optimization"
>> Is this a regressio
Le 29/03/2012 08:47, Matt Burgess a écrit :
> On Wed, 2012-03-28 at 22:39 -0400, Ivan Wagner wrote:
>> Matt,
>>
>>> Whoops, yes, it was in chapter 6, but not in chapter 5. Fixed in r9792.
>> The fix got put in the middle of something else so that the line now reads:
>>
>> "The Glibc documentation
Hi,
When building with the "old" toolchain (gcc-4.6.3, glibc-2.14.1, svn
r9785), the ouput of:
echo 'int main(){}' | gcc -v -Wl,--verbose -xc -
(with PATH=/tools/bin:...)
after gcc-pass2 gives:
[...]
GGC heuristics: --param ggc-min-expand=100 --param ggc-min-heapsize=131072
ignoring nonexistent
Le 29/03/2012 19:13, Pierre Labastie a écrit :
> Hi,
>
> #include "..." search starts here:
> #include<...> search starts here:
>/mnt/lfs/tools/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.7.0/include
>/mnt/lfs/tools/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-g
Le 29/03/2012 22:59, Jeremy Huntwork a écrit :
> Le 29/03/2012 19:13, Pierre Labastie a écrit :
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> #include "..." search starts here:
>>> #include<...>search starts here:
>>> /mnt/lfs/tools/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-
Le 22/04/2012 20:23, DJ Lucas wrote:
> On 04/22/2012 12:19 PM, Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
>> On 4/22/12 11:33 AM, LFS Trac wrote:
>>> #3066: Chapter 5 ncurses fails with (old?) gpm on host
>>> -+--
>>> Reporter: dj@…
Le 22/04/2012 21:10, Bruce Dubbs a écrit :
> Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
>> On 4/22/12 2:49 PM, Pierre Labastie wrote:
>>> Solution:
>>> add the switch --with-native-system-header-dir=/tools/include to
>>> gcc-pass2 configure command.
>>> I've been
Le 22/04/2012 22:09, Jeremy Huntwork a écrit :
> On 4/22/12 3:48 PM, Pierre Labastie wrote:
>> I think the sysroot method can be simplified if using the switch above:
>> you do not even need the part:
>>
>> cp gcc/Makefile.in{,.orig}
>> sed '/^CROSS_SYS
Le 22/04/2012 23:07, Jeremy Huntwork a écrit :
> Looks good, committing the change to the jh branch. Thanks Pierre.
>
You're welcome.
I take the opportunity to thank you, all the editors of those
wonderfull books (lfs and blfs). I really enjoy interacting with
you. You're reactive, knowlegeable an
Le 23/04/2012 18:45, Jeremy Huntwork a écrit :
> This changelog entry on 2012-04-05 isn't quite correct. It reads:
>
> [matthew] - Use su from chapter 6 Coreutils in the Bash instructions,
> instead of the one from chapter 5. Install su as su rather than su-tools
> in chapter 5. Fixes #3057.
>
> co
Le 23/04/2012 23:01, Bruce Dubbs a écrit :
> Matt Burgess wrote:
>
>> '../gcc-4.7.0/contrib/test_summary>> $TEST_LOG 2>&1', hence giving the
>> appearance that the tests were run twice. I wonder whether that 2nd
>> command should just have 'role=nodump' in it to prevent jhalfs from
>> running it?
Le 23/04/2012 22:38, Jeremy Huntwork a écrit :
> On 4/23/12 4:33 PM, Matt Burgess wrote:
>> The fix for this is to add
>> --with-native-system-header-dir=/tools/include to GCC's pass1 and pass2
>> builds so that it doesn't look at /usr/include at all.
> For the current build method, I think it's on
Le 23/04/2012 22:34, Bruce Dubbs a écrit :
> Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>
>> It appears there are multiple ways to isolate the programs we need in
>> Chapter 6 to /tools. For us, the simpler the better. I think we ought
>> to do a little more testing, but it's looking good.
> I'm still in the initial bui
Le 24/04/2012 11:00, Matthew Burgess a écrit :
>
> 1) sudo chmod a=rx,u+s /tools/bin/su in chapter 5 coreutils
> 2) Dropped the getlogin.c sed from chapter 6 coreutils
>
> The test still fails. It appears to be because of the way that jhalfs is
> setting things
> up. The test assumes you will ha
Le 25/04/2012 03:35, Ken Moffat a écrit :
> On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 02:18:40AM +0100, Ken Moffat wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 08:43:43PM +0100, Ken Moffat wrote:
>>
>> Still doing this after chapter 6 is complete, but at a differnet
>> line in the same file. Oddly, if I try 'make' *after* t
Le 24/04/2012 02:38, Andrew Benton a écrit :
> If you only add --with-native-system-header-dir=/tools/include to the
> second pass of gcc then you will still need --without-ppl and
> --without-cloog for the second pass of gcc.
>
> I get a build failure if I try to build without
> --with-native-syst
Le 07/05/2012 14:46, Andrew Benton a écrit :
> Including cairo/cairo.h in every header seems like quite a large
> sledgehammer to crack a nut. Perhaps a more delicate solution would be
> (for librsvg-2.36.1):
>
> sed -i '/_gir_CFLAGS/s#$# -I/usr/include/cairo#' Makefile.in
>
> Andy
Thanks,
I like t
Le 07/05/2012 18:00, Ken Moffat a écrit :
> In my case I build dbus, cairo, gtk-doc, dbus-glib, ...,
> gobject-introspection in that order, followed by pango, atk,
> shared-mime-info, cups, gdk-pixbuf, gtk2, gtk3. I don't imagine that
> variations in the build order are causing this, but librsvg
Le 08/05/2012 22:22, Pierre Labastie a écrit :
>
>> The Firefox and Seamonkey pages have a paragraph that mentions how you
>> can install all the development libs. If they need changing to
>> accommodate icedtea please let me know.
>>
>> Andy
> Thanks for poi
> DEBIAN/control << EOF
Package: gcc-lfs
Version: 4.4.3
Architecture: i386
Maintainer: Pierre Labastie
Depends: mpfr
Provides: gcc, g++
Description: GNU compiler collection (C and C++)
This package is the LFS installation of the GNU compiler collection,
which contains only
C and C
Le 02/06/2012 18:00, Jeremy Huntwork a écrit :
> I'm going to start by jumping on the parser, since it will be necessary
> right away for any of this to work. My initial thoughts are to build one
> parser that can accept different output filters, for example, outputting
> to PKGBUILD files, or rpm
Le 03/06/2012 06:22, Bruce Dubbs a écrit :
> This is mostly for Matt, but others may take note.
>
> I was adding new pages to LFS and had a hard time getting pkg-config to
> be recognized by jhalfs. What I found out was that the xml code:
>
>
>
> and the file name
>
> pkg-config-0.26-inte
Le 03/06/2012 06:22, Bruce Dubbs a écrit :
> I originally had filename="pkgconfig.html" and jhalfs couldn't file the
> package and didn't give a warning or error. It just failed when the
> build got to that point. In this case, after several hours. :(
>
> -- Bruce
>
>
BTW,
Once the correct
Le 02/06/2012 18:00, Jeremy Huntwork a écrit :
> I'm going to start by jumping on the parser, since it will be
> necessary right away for any of this to work. My initial thoughts are
> to build one parser that can accept different output filters, for
> example, outputting to PKGBUILD files, or r
Le 12/07/2012 05:18, Bryan Kadzban a écrit :
> Matt Burgess wrote:
>> On Sun, 2012-07-01 at 18:20 +0100, Andrew Benton wrote:
>>> Fixed by this sed in the gcc source before the first pass of gcc:
>>>
>>> sed -i '/k prot/agcc_cv_libc_provides_ssp=yes' gcc/configure
>> I don't mind displaying my lack
Hello,
I know it has been reported by Tobias on lfs-support, but it seems to me
it is an issue with the current version of check, and it should be
addressed in the book:
- the error occurs during make:
/bin/bash ../libtool --tag=CC --mode=compile gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_
Le 25/11/2012 19:06, Matt Burgess a écrit :
> Hmm, on a Fedora 17 host, I get:
>
> checking for pipe... yes
> checking for putenv... yes
> checking for setenv... yes
> checking for sleep... yes
> checking for strdup... yes
> checking for strsignal... yes
> checking for unsetenv... yes
>
> Looks lik
Le 25/11/2012 23:38, Ken Moffat a écrit :
> On Sun, Nov 25, 2012 at 11:04:01PM +0100, Pierre Labastie wrote:
>
>> At this place in the book, everything should be independant on what is
>> on the host, shouldn't it ? librt and libpthread are both from glibc. I
>> more
1 - 100 of 212 matches
Mail list logo
