Dan Moore wrote these words on 06/08/06 22:14 CST:
> Maybe I missed something in the LFS SVN-20060531 book,
Seems as though you did.
> Is this an known issue? ...or what did I miss along the way?
Section 6.2.1
--
Randy
rmlscsi: [bogomips 1003.27] [GNU ld version 2.16.1] [gcc (GCC) 4.0.3]
[GN
Dan Nicholson wrote these words on 06/20/06 13:31 CST:
> * Linux-2.6.17 or stick with 2.6.16 series?
>
> * Package updates within same series (udev, e2fsprogs, shadow, bison?)
If we keep mentioning these types of issues, we will *never* get a
book out. Package updates (security issue with the ke
Dan Nicholson wrote these words on 06/20/06 15:28 CST:
> So, here's one implementation of a shell script that could be
> installed as /usr/bin/rebuild-info.
-1
Are you saying that users could remember 'rebuild-info' better than
'install-info'? Or is it just that if by chance they can remember
'r
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote these words in the
HLFS-Book mailing list on 07/02/06 14:18 CST:
> Date: 2006-07-02 13:18:42 -0600 (Sun, 02 Jul 2006)
> New Revision: 664
> Add sed command to coreutils chapter 6 to fix overflow in the 'who' command
> (Redhat bug #158405).
Would this be applicable to the
Robert Connolly wrote these words on 07/02/06 14:40 CST:
[fixed top-posting]
> On July 2, 2006 03:28 pm, Randy McMurchy wrote:
>> Would this be applicable to the other LFS branches as well?
>
> It's in LFS-svn.
Sorry for the noise. The IDLESTR threw me off as well as I would
Hi all,
It seems that several months ago funds were raised to replace the
Belgarath server with new hardware. What is the status on this
project? To me, it would be a 2-3 day thing (or easily done in a
free weekend).
I'm asking because there was a public call for funds, and the funds
were raised.
Hi all,
As it appears there are no remaining Editors in the LFS project
(Archaic may just be on an extended exodus) other than Jim G., who
commits most (all) of his time to the CLFS project, I would like
to recommend Dan Nicholson (if he is willing) to be given commit
privileges to the LFS repo, a
Gerard Beekmans wrote these words on 07/09/06 20:10 CST:
> To get the ball rolling on this 6.2 release Bruce has stepped up to the
> plate and offered to get that coordinated and I've given him the "green
> light" if you will to get this done without further delays.
Who-hoo! Attaboy, Bruce.
It
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 07/14/06 22:46 CST:
> I am ready to branch lfs-6.2-pre1. This is a last call for changes
> before that is done.
To me, this breakage discovered when the find command was moved is
a show-stopper.
--
Randy
rmlscsi: [bogomips 1003.23] [GNU ld version 2.16.1] [gcc
Andrew Benton wrote these words on 07/15/06 07:06 CST:
> Randy McMurchy wrote:
>> It is whatever you want to call instructions that are wrong and
>> don't work. You sir, may call it anything you like. I will, however,
>> fix the book.
>
> So don't they work
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 07/15/06 08:44 CST:
> Robert Connolly wrote:
>>
>> sed 's/^XCFLAGS =$/& -fomit-frame-pointer/'
>>
>> sed 's/^XCFLAGS =/& -fomit-frame-pointer/'
>
> I'd be interested in other opinions.
I fail to see what Robert's sed does. To me, it either:
1) does exactly the sa
Robert Connolly wrote these words on 07/15/06 09:14 CST:
> XCFLAGS = -g -O2
>
> sed 's/^XCFLAGS =$/& -fomit-frame-pointer/' will change it into:
>
> XCFLAGS = -g -O2 -fomit-frame-pointer
Not on my systems. That sed will not match the line!
'^XCFLAGS =$' does not equal 'XCFLAGS = -g -O2'
Those
Robert Connolly wrote these words on 07/15/06 11:13 CST:
> Both '^XCFLAGS =$' and '^XCFLAGS =' match this.
Okay then, explain this:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]: ~/build > cat tf
stuff
XCFLAGS = -g -O2
more stuff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]: ~/build > sed 's/^XCFLAGS =$/& -fomit-frame-pointer/' tf
stuff
XCFLAGS = -
Alex Merry wrote these words on 07/15/06 12:59 CST:
> It will not for example, match
> XCFLAGS = -g -O2
> The reason is obvious: there is no end-of-line after the =, which is
> what $ matches.
Exactly what I've been trying to get across to Robert, but every time
I've provided an example 'sed' to
Miguel Bazdresch wrote these words on 07/15/06 19:11 CST:
> Goodbye and thank you for choosing
You gotta be joking me, it actually says this? :-)
> and now my system's b0rked. Watch this:
>
> 0[/bin]$ l | grep tool
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 15 Nov 18 2005 bash -> /tools/bin/bash
>
Chris Staub wrote these words on 07/18/06 09:08 CST:
> Patch with a number of text fixes for the book. In particular, that note
> in the kernel page about GCC 2.95.3 is unneeded since the kernel
> documentation has now been updated.
> Disable the installation of the groups program
> -a
Chris Staub wrote these words on 07/18/06 09:35 CST:
> There are multiple man pages, for different languages.
I forgot about that. Thanks.
> It does work and it creates both /tmp and /var/tmp.
Indeed. Again, thanks.
--
Randy
rmlscsi: [bogomips 1003.23] [GNU ld version 2.16.1] [gcc (GCC) 4.0
Miguel Bazdresch wrote these words on 07/19/06 06:37 CST:
> The system boots and I have installed the following blfs packages:
>
> [snip list of 30 or so packages]
>
> Everything seems to work.
I can confirm Miguel's report along with about 580 additional
BLFS and Non-BLFS packages. :-)
--
Ra
Matthew Burgess wrote these words on 07/21/06 16:51 CST:
> Dan Nicholson wrote:
>
>> Does anyone know what creates /etc/blkid.tab?
>
> e2fsprogs
You may wish to 'man blkid' for more information.
--
Randy
rmlscsi: [bogomips 1003.23] [GNU ld version 2.16.1] [gcc (GCC) 4.0.3]
[GNU C Library stab
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 07/25/06 15:22 CST:
> Matthew Burgess wrote:
>> Note that the patch exists in the repo with the incorrect name, so the
>> instructions do work as is.
>
> Thanks. I can fix that for the final.
I see the patch name was fixed in the list of patches, but it
appears t
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 08/01/06 20:36 CST:
> Its not a bug, its an educational feature. :)
Unfortunately, your "educational feature" is in conflict with the
well-established guidelines of the patches project. Please review the
guidelines and create a new patch.
--
Randy
rmlscsi: [bo
Dan Nicholson wrote these words on 08/01/06 22:46 CST:
> Randy, I thought you wanted Bruce to use the upstream patches earlier today?
It was determined that he would not, so, the least that could happen
is the LFS-created patch conforms to the well-established guidelines
set forth by the patches
Dan Nicholson wrote these words on 07/31/06 09:42 CST:
> Jim, can we assume you meant 2006, or are you truly living in the future?
Then Dan makes this patch:
Submitted By: Dan Nicholson
Date: 2006-09-02
Initial Package Version: 4.4.20
Origin: Upstream - http://www.sleepycat.com/update/4.4.20/pa
Dan Nicholson wrote these words on 08/03/06 15:39 CST:
> In my defense, Bruce originally wrote that date. I just overlooked it.
Sure, Future Boy. Sure, whatever you say. :-)
(BTW, the smiley means I'm just kidding around)
--
Randy
rmlscsi: [bogomips 1003.27] [GNU ld version 2.16.1] [gcc (GCC
Hi all,
Apparently, something has happened (or has been modified) to the
Trac system's ability to automatically produce email messages when
a ticket is added/modified and when book commits are received.
This should be an elementary item to fix, as I have Trac installations
on other servers using
[This is a resend to try and figure out why message are not being
posted]
Original Message
Subject: Automessaging from Trac
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2006 09:11:34 -0500
From: Randy McMurchy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: BLFS Dev , LFS Dev
Hi all,
Apparently, something has happen
Dan Nicholson wrote these words on 08/04/06 17:09 CST:
> Thanks, Peter. I'll fix it in trunk.
Just a suggestion, but you should probably fix it in the 6.2 branch
(or tag, whichever it is) as well, because I can't help but think
with the release being a first-time thing for Bruce (no offense
inten
Matthew Burgess wrote these words on 08/06/06 16:16 CST:
> A recent article on lwn.net discussing LFS
> (http://lwn.net/Articles/192904/) attracted the following comment:
>
> "...it's worrying the number of little patches that the LFS instructions
> say need applying to the upstream source: why
Hi all,
Noted that there is some minor trivial updates to CLFS recently, the
occasional package updates to LFS, and updates to jalfs (which is only
as good as the [x]LFS books), there really is no development going
on at all any more within the LFS project.
Discussion (you know, where people inte
Robert Connolly wrote these words on 08/27/06 22:20 CST:
> All I'm trying to say is that adding someone to group root should not be
> exploitable, at least not without further misconfiguration.
And all Bruce (as well as myself) is saying is that *nobody* should
be added to the root group unless t
Dan Nicholson wrote these words on 08/28/06 08:52 CST:
> I have to agree with Robert on this one. If something is known to
> install with weak permissions, I think we should change them instead
> of writing it off as bad packaging. The fix is simple enough.
The argument is not the permissions of
Hi all,
Here is a bug report I've been meaning to send in for months. Upon
booting my machine this evening, I decided to send it in. I get an
error, that suspends the boot process, which says it is a problem
with the LFS bootscripts.
Following is the error recorded in the /dev/bugreport file. Let
LFS Trac wrote these words on 09/01/06 04:26 CST:
> #1869: locatedb should be in /var/lib/misc not /var/lib/locate for FHS
> compliance
> +---
> +---
> Co
Alexander E. Patrakov wrote these words on 09/07/06 22:38 CST:
> However, this can
> be changed if the majority votes for it.
I can't remember the last time at least 5 people voted on anything
in an (x)LFS proposal. Seems now that one vote agreeing with
someone's proposal is enough. If I remembe
Peter Ennis wrote these words on 09/08/06 10:55 CST:
> So, what is your vote?
I don't understand the issue well enough to pass judgment either way.
Perhaps there are many (or am I the only dumb one?) that cannot vote
on this issue for the same reason.
However, my comment was more generic in natu
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 09/15/06 11:19 CST:
> In accordance with BLFS prior practices, I am designating Randy McMurchy
> as the new BLFS Project leader. Please support him as you supported me
> as BLFS moves forward.
Thanks for the tremendous efforts you put forth into the pr
Mark Rosenstand wrote:
On Sun, 2006-10-22 at 21:33 -0500, Randy McMurchy wrote:
I'm leaning to 6.2.0. Here's why:
I don't know how to increment from 6.2 and still be within the LFS-6.2
structure. BLFS-6.2.1 makes no sense if there wasn't a 6.2.0 version.
This is how mo
Hi all,
I know I'm guilty as much as anyone for lack of contribution
recently, though I *have* tried a couple of times to get
something done, but Belgarath ended up being down, or I could
not send mail, or whatever. I don't believe this Belgarath
upgrade is going to happen, and the project is com
[cc'd to LFS-Dev in hopes for as much input as possible]
Hi all,
There was a commit to the BLFS book on the 4th, but the rendering of
the book didn't happen. Is Belgarath still scheduled to render every
night?
--
Randy
rmlscsi: [bogomips 1003.25] [GNU ld version 2.16.1] [gcc (GCC) 4.0.3]
[GNU
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 12/05/06 20:37 CST:
> Randy McMurchy wrote:
>> Is Belgarath still scheduled to render every
>> night?
>
> Anduin does it from a cron script. See /usr/bin/render-blfs-book.sh
> there. It does require belgarath to be up for svn and ssh th
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 12/05/06 22:09 CST:
>
> I wonder if isn't something between you and belgarath.
I suppose that is what it is. And since Belgarath is the only
problem I'm *ever* encountering, I don't think I can fix it.
I'll be back in a week or two and see if things aren't any
bet
Alexander E. Patrakov wrote these words on 12/07/06 00:10 CST:
>
> This is a formal request to either integrate Tushar's hint on installing
> multiple versions of autotools into the LFS book, or move autotools to
> BLFS and integrate the hint there.
-1. I can't see multiple versions of autotools
Jeremy Huntwork wrote these words on 12/07/06 06:20 CST:
>
> Isn't it common practice in various distros to include multiple
> autotools packages and install them as autofoo-version?
Dunno, I don't use "various distros". All I know is that Alexander
gave an example of *one* package that may need
Alexander E. Patrakov wrote these words on 12/07/06 06:36 CST:
>
> Yes, except that there is currently no reiser4 page, but it is not my
> point (I could just as well create it in the wiki). The question is
> whether we install /usr/bin/auto* just for beauty (with no intention to
> call it), or
Hi all,
There is a ticket in Trac for an issue with GSView-4.7.
http://wiki.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/ticket/2175
The issue is valid. The new EPS Ghostscript internal versioning
scheme breaks GSView. I found that simply modifying src/gvcver.h
in the GSView sources fixes the issue. I simply substi
Hi all,
This is mostly a note for Tushar, but FYI for others. I'd like to
close out http://wiki.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/ticket/1980 by
removing the autoreconf command.
Tushar is assigned to the ticket, so I'll wait a couple of days for
a reply from him.
--
Randy
rmlscsi: [bogomips 1003.25] [
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 12/07/06 12:04 CST:
>
> You make a good point. The question in my mind is which versions
> (plural) of autotools should be installed? Perhaps the most recent
> version and then a discussion of the issues and a generic "install
> additional versions as required lik
Matthew Burgess wrote these words on 12/07/06 12:26 CST:
>
> If, as it appears, the versions we install in LFS are causing you folks in
> BLFS headaches, I'd prefer to just let you install the version(s) you
> require rather than force the latest version on you resulting in either of
> us having to
Alexander E. Patrakov wrote these words on 12/17/06 02:22 CST:
>
> if nobody has objections, I am going to release r1796 of both trunk and
> the 6.2 branch as 6.3-pre1 and 6.2-4 CDs. The build has already started
> on ums.usu.ru for trunk.
Just FYI, Alexander, but nobody can really see what is b
Gerard Beekmans wrote these words on 07/09/06 20:14 CST:
> Jim Gifford wrote:
>> Also, does anyone know what's happened to archaic??
>
> I personally have no clue.
I did notice that he no longer contributes to the project,
however, he does log into the LFS server (quantum) approximately
twice a w
Hi all,
Recently, I made a motion to make Tushar and Dan editors of the LFS
book. I believe both were accepted by the community and now have
priv's to update the LFS book.
I am now proposing that Alexander Patrakov have his LFS commit priv's
restored, so that he may make updates as he feels neces
Justin R. Knierim wrote these words on 01/12/07 19:59 CST:
> It is up to date now, as soon as Anduin updates, if you still notice
> issues, let me know.
I'm not sure why, but some of the packages did not get updated on
Anduin. Take the gnome-games package for example. The SVN book shows
that 2.1
Randy McMurchy wrote these words on 01/13/07 13:41 CST:
> Justin R. Knierim wrote these words on 01/12/07 19:59 CST:
>
>> It is up to date now, as soon as Anduin updates, if you still notice
>> issues, let me know.
>
> I'm not sure why, but some of the packages di
Dan Nicholson wrote these words on 01/13/07 13:15 CST:
> Agreed on the schedule. I've been awfully quiet for weeks, but I've
> been working my way through a new system, and I think I have a lot of
> fixes to add in
Excellent!
Thanks, Dan.
--
Randy
rmlscsi: [bogomips 1003.26] [GNU ld version
Justin R. Knierim wrote these words on 01/13/07 13:54 CST:
> Thanks, those two hadn't been updated, they are now.
Just an FYI, but the Totem package has not been updated as well.
Is there anything I can do to help determine what all packages
still need to be updated?
--
Randy
rmlscsi: [bogomi
Randy McMurchy wrote these words on 01/13/07 15:20 CST:
> Is there anything I can do to help determine what all packages
> still need to be updated?
Justin,
As I think about this I'm wondering if you can't maintain a list
of the BLFS svn packages on the master server, and then
M.Canales.es wrote these words on 01/14/07 13:19 CST:
> Committed in r6393 an LFS-like stylesheet to create a wget-list file. To
> generate it, run "make wget-list".
You are the man, Manuel!
Thanks a bunch.
--
Randy
rmlscsi: [bogomips 1003.26] [GNU ld version 2.16.1] [gcc (GCC) 4.0.3]
[GNU
nadav vinik wrote these words on 01/14/07 15:32 CST:
> Is it possible to become formal LFS developer and how?
Yes. Typically, one would contribute for a while to the development
and support mailing lists and also submit patches (patching the
actual book's XML) to fix bugs in the Trac system. This
Hi all,
The BLFS book lists as download URLs for packages on the Sourceforge
server as http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/... This brings up a
screen where you can choose a mirror.
I've noticed that if you drop the "pr" and just use
http://downloads.sourceforge.net/... then a mirror is automatica
Dan Nicholson wrote these words on 01/15/07 11:46 CST:
> I just noticed that one a couple weeks ago, too. So much better. I'm
> all for changing the link.
Okay, here's a plan. I'm looking for +1 or -1 to the idea:
1. Change all the prdownloads to just downloads.
2. Create an xinclude file that s
Hi all,
Though the invitation and acceptance was accomplished through a
public forum (blfs-dev), there's not been any official announcement.
I'm honored to announce that Alexander Patrakov has accepted an
invitation to become a BLFS Editor. As all of you know, Alexander
has been a member of the c
Dan Nicholson wrote these words on 01/17/07 14:23 CST:
> I think the right think to do is to move the glib/gtk/pango/atk links
> to the gnome.org server.
Not that it matters to me, really, but I'm the one that has tried
to keep a GTK.org link in the book in the glib/gtk packages. I've
always thou
Dan Nicholson wrote these words on 01/19/07 14:01 CST:
> Sorry. These guys have security fixes, so I'd prefer they go in. The
> updates are totally straightforward. But I'll understand if we've
> frozen and you want to push to 6.2.1.
>
> Regardless of what happens with this one, I'll be sure to d
Dan Nicholson wrote these words on 01/19/07 14:26 CST:
> I'd like to update the tbird enigmail to 0.94.2. There's a bugfix that
> was important enough to have a CVE assigned to it (2006-5877).
Sounds good to me. And not just because of the bug-fix, but because
it is the version we're *supposed* t
Randy McMurchy wrote these words on 01/30/07 13:12 CST:
> Now, should these "home directories" be in /srv? I'm not sure, but
> the FHS seems to think not.
Rereading the original message over in -support now leads me to
believe Luca was right. The motd file *is* public data
Matthew Burgess wrote these words on 01/30/07 13:54 CST:
> Just spotted a typo in the Caution box at the top of the Unzip page:
>
> Let me know if you'd rather have these reports as
> Trac tickets, and I'll gladly raise them.
No, we'd rather have them as patches to the book's XML! :-)
Just ki
Hi all,
Going through the book, preparing for release, I noticed that the
'Preface' section is different than the rest of the book. By different
I mean that the XML structure is different. The 'Preface' file includes
all the sections in one file, even though these sections are
differentiated in th
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 01/30/07 20:01 CST:
> I think you, or whoever is the lead editor, would be the only one to
> edit that section. What we have now is what Larry Lawrence put together
> ages ago (or was it Mark Hymers). Whatever is convenient for you is OK
> with me.
That's what I
Deepak Barua wrote these words on 01/30/07 20:14 CST:
> When i was following the instructions of LFS i noticed that there
> was no mention of the linux threads addons in the instructions i found
> out through a friend of mine about that.
Please be more specific. The current LFS instructions p
Dan Nicholson wrote these words on 02/03/07 12:11 CST:
> On 2/3/07, TheOldFellow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> What I need is something it can't handle, like Udev for several months a
>> year ago, or a new booting scheme...
>
> This is actually something I want to bring up. Our booting is dog
> sl
Bryan Kadzban wrote these words on 02/03/07 12:55 CST:
> But the machine I'm on right now is too loud at
> night, so I shut it down then, which means it boots up around once a
> day. When you boot more often, it obviously makes more sense to speed
> up the boot. ;-)
Point taken from you and Dan
Dan Nicholson wrote these words on 02/03/07 12:39 CST:
> vsftpd can use the library libcap (see vsf_findlibs.sh in the source
> tree). It's a simple library that basically just wraps the syscalls in
> and puts its API in . vsftpd
> will just make the syscalls itself if doesn't exist
> (see sysdep
Dan Nicholson wrote these words on 02/03/07 13:55 CST:
> I'm starting to add the contents for Xorg-7 (programs, libraries,
> directories). How explicit should I be with these things? Do we want
> full descriptions and index entries for the programs and libraries? I
> don't mind doing it, but I want
Hi all,
It is with great pride that the BLFS team announces the release of
BLFS-6.2.0-rc1. This release is a candidate for the actual 6.2.0
release due out on February 14th, and is the complement to LFS 6.2.
It has been almost 18 months since the last release of BLFS and
many new packages and ins
Hi all,
Is there something wrong with the rendering of the LFS development book?
I'm looking at http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/development/
and it appears it's been almost two months since the book was rendered.
Am I looking in the wrong place for the current LFS dev book?
--
Randy
r
Matthew Burgess wrote these words on 02/04/07 10:19 CST:
> Note that there are no other
> render scripts in /usr/bin either, so none of the other books will be getting
> generated automatically for the time being.
Note that the BLFS dev book is being rendered on Anduin, then copied
over to Quantu
Hi all,
I've created a 6.2 branch from trunk, and BLFS-SVN is wide-open again.
Changes that go into BLFS-SVN that also are valid for 6.2.x will be
merged from trunk.
If you can for the next couple of weeks (and perhaps going forward
as well), please annotate on your commit message if the commit i
Randy McMurchy wrote these words on 02/04/07 10:31 CST:
> I've created a 6.2 branch from trunk, and BLFS-SVN is wide-open again.
> Changes that go into BLFS-SVN that also are valid for 6.2.x will be
> merged from trunk.
Another thing I forgot to mention. It's probably wise t
Dan Nicholson wrote these words on 02/04/07 12:31 CST:
> I was thinking for after the release, but if you want to give it a
> whirl and Randy approves, go for it.
Gosh, I'm sort of torn on that one.
Does the note in the book accomplish the mission? If so, I think we
should leave it the way it is
Hi all,
Just an FYI, but I had errors building Glibc in chapter 6 of the dev
book, which I've not seen before. Doesn't seem to be a great big deal,
but they are unusual for me on this system.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]: /mnt/rml3/build/glibc-build > grep Error check.log
make[2]: *** [/build/glibc-build/d
Hi all,
Noted in the logs of NCurses:
mode of `/usr/lib/libformw.so.5.6' retained as 0755 (rwxr-xr-x)
mode of `/usr/lib/libmenuw.so.5.6' retained as 0755 (rwxr-xr-x)
mode of `/usr/lib/libncursesw.so.5.6' retained as 0755 (rwxr-xr-x)
mode of `/usr/lib/libpanelw.so.5.6' retained as 0755 (rwxr-xr-x)
Hi all,
More log reviews show:
mode of `/lib/libreadline.so' changed to 0755 (rwxr-xr-x)
mode of `/lib/libreadline.so.5' retained as 0755 (rwxr-xr-x)
mode of `/lib/libreadline.so.5.2' retained as 0755 (rwxr-xr-x)
mode of `/lib/libhistory.so' changed to 0755 (rwxr-xr-x)
mode of `/lib/libhistory.so
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 02/06/07 00:02 CST:
> Could these permissions vary with a user's umask? When entering the
> chroot, we blow away the user's environment, but is the umask inherited?
Not sure, but because these permission issues were first reported
by me, and now some seem to be f
Ag. Hatzimanikas wrote these words on 02/06/07 00:36 CST:
> db-4.5.20-build:ownership of `/usr/share/doc/db-4.5.20' retained as root:root
I concur with Ag's report about BDB. Do note however, that all files
under the /usr/share/doc/db-4.5.20 dir still need to be chowned.
These have not been fixe
Hi all,
The current LFS SVN has an entirely upgraded toolchain, and many
updates to core packages since the 6.2 release. I just built it and
it appears rock solid. Booted without a hitch (using Linux-2.16.20,
Udev-105 and current LFS bootscripts). So far, everything seems really
solid.
I propose
Randy McMurchy wrote these words on 02/08/07 00:52 CST:
> (using Linux-2.16.20
Um, that would be 2.6.20
--
Randy
rmlscsi: [bogomips 1003.26] [GNU ld version 2.16.1] [gcc (GCC) 4.0.3]
[GNU C Library stable release version 2.3.6] [Linux 2.6.14.3 i686]
00:55:00 up 29 days, 1:09, 1 user, l
It is with great pride that the BLFS team announces the release of
BLFS-6.2.0-rc2. This release is a candidate for the actual 6.2.0
release due out on February 14th, and is the complement to LFS 6.2.
It has been almost 18 months since the last release of BLFS and
many new packages and instructions
Dan Nicholson wrote these words on 02/08/07 08:27 CST:
> Robert has put together a patch with updates from the
> upstream 2.5 branch. We may want to apply some or all of it:
>
> http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/patches/downloads/glibc/glibc-2.5-branch_update-1.patch
But that is for the 2.4 branch,
Dan Nicholson wrote these words on 02/08/07 09:41 CST:
>>> http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/patches/downloads/glibc/glibc-2.5-branch_update-1.patch
>> But that is for the 2.4 branch, right? Not saying we need it or
>> not, just identifying that I remember that it was for the old
>> kernel series. Or
Hi all,
I noticed this (and since fixed) in my personal render script, but
on Quantum the images are not being popluated (due to we don't use
a "current" dir any longer), so no images are displayed when viewing
the development book on-line.
--
Randy
rmlscsi: [bogomips 1003.26] [GNU ld version 2
Matthew Burgess wrote these words on 02/08/07 13:05 CST:
> I'll go through Trac and reassess milestones and such like tonight, but I
> think a 6.3 release within 1 month is feasible. Does everyone else agree?
Sounds good, Matt. And actually, there's no rush, I just mentioned
it to stimulate som
M.Canales.es wrote these words on 02/08/07 14:06 CST:
> But I will agree if you can investigate how FOP-0.93, and it dependencies,
> should be installed.
I'm already on that one. There's no reason that BLFS trunk can't be
updated with it.
--
Randy
rmlscsi: [bogomips 1003.26] [GNU ld version 2
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 02/08/07 19:04 CST:
> But that makes the book dependent on another package. Larry put the
> images for BLFS into subversion in May 2004. I never noticed before
> that LFS did it differently.
Didn't we just have this discussion? Or one similar? Seems we did.
Howe
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 02/08/07 19:58 CST:
> Randy McMurchy wrote:
>> 1) We don't have to piggy-back the images along as they are already
>>available on disk.
>> 2) The images are updated in our book as they are updated in the XSL
>>styleshee
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 02/08/07 20:33 CST:
> Addressing the issues above:
>
> 1. The five images take up less than 4K. SVN control of *all* the
> content in the book is much more important than an upgrade that may
> happen automatically. If a change is made, I'd like us to do it expl
Alexander E. Patrakov wrote these words on 02/08/07 21:18 CST:
> And, while we are discussing the XML topic, I would like someone to look at
> this file from DIY-linux and tell me if this is a valid BLFS XML setup
> criticism:
>
> http://cvs.diy-linux.org/index.cgi/*checkout*/refbuild/README?re
Dan Nicholson wrote these words on 02/09/07 12:50 CST:
> I would add "having version control" to that list. Having the images
> in svn allows us to track the history of the images instead of being
> tied to some external thing.
The "version control" of the images is already taken care of in the
X
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 02/09/07 13:24 CST:
> But the version control is WRT the XSL Stylesheets package, not the
> LFS/BLFS books. If they changed the images to be twice as big (or twice
> as small), I don't think we would want those to *automatically* go into
> the books.
I think tha
Hi all,
Forced to bite the bullet and install Xorg-7.1 and wanted to say
that y'all did a great job with the instructions. This is the first
time I've read them and attempted to install. I've only scripted out
the Protos installation, and it installed perfectly (in /usr/X11R7),
but the remaining s
Dan Nicholson wrote these words on 02/09/07 18:33 CST:
> Something like:
>
> case `basename ${PWD}` in
>xload-[0-9]*) patch -Np1 -i ../xload-blah.patch ;;
> esac
Yeah, I thought about a 'case' but didn't think the extra syntax
was worth it in my situation. Additionally, I'm more for letting
201 - 300 of 1031 matches
Mail list logo
