Dan Nicholson wrote these words on 10/12/08 11:46 CST:
> Usually the reason is because the path to the tools gets built into
> another script/program. In the dependencies appendix, it says that sed
> must be built before e2fsprogs. I think it's mk_cmds that hardcodes
> the location of sed, but tha
Robert Connolly wrote:
> As root, I tried every 'groupmems' option, and they all work. I'm using
> shadow-4.1.2.1, glibc-2.8-20080908, binutils-2.18.50.0.9, and
> gcc-4.2.5-20080903.
I cannot reproduce the segfault. Not sure why. Strange.
One thing that needs to be reported upstream, however.
Hi all,
Mostly a question for DJ, but FYI for everyone else.
I noticed in your experimental book you use an updated
version of the bootscripts. Does SVN need to be updated
as well?
I know you and Dan did some stuff for the LSB side of
things, but not sure if SVN needs to be updated. Probably
so,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Author: dj
> Date: 2008-10-12 13:04:50 -0600 (Sun, 12 Oct 2008)
> New Revision: 8651
>
> Modified:
>trunk/BOOK/chapter01/changelog.xml
>trunk/BOOK/chapter06/iproute2.xml
> Log:
> Removed broken move in iproute2 commands.
DJ, there's much more broken than just th
[cc'ing to LFS-Dev]
Wolfgang Messingschlager wrote:
> I suggest before issuing within grub
> setup (hd0)
> the file /boot/grub/menu.lst should be created. This is much safer,
> because it can happen that the system crashes between overwriting the
> MBT and creating /boot/grub/menu.lst.
>
>
Trent Shea wrote:
> On Sunday 12 October 2008 14:11:49 Trent Shea wrote:
>> I wouldn't want to start altering instructions to reflect possible
>> scenarios though.
>
> Well, still... It feels odd that we would be worried about the system
> crashing at this point (ie. the last thing we are doing:)
Hi all,
There was a ticket opened, and since closed as invalid that
some Udev rules belong in /lib/udev instead of /etc/udev.
To me, Udev rules are configuration items and belong in
/etc, but that's just my opinion.
There was a mention (not sure how valid it is) that the
Udev maintainers suggest
DJ Lucas wrote:
> Sorry...already reopened as I didn't see Bruce's comment about closing
> it. Closed it again. Well anyway, Dan posted a link to the
> conversation upstream.
>
> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.hotplug.devel/12895
>
> Bottom line, it is still left to opinion for now. H
[ from http://wiki.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/ticket/2239 ]
#2239: patch-2.5.9
Comment (by [EMAIL PROTECTED]):
It used to be on the Gnu alpha site: http://alpha.gnu.org/gnu/
but is no longer there. The only place I can find it is:
http://ftp.de.debian.org/debian/pool/main/p/patch/patch_2.5.
Matthew Burgess wrote:
> I'd prefer to follow upstream and put the Udev supplied default rules in
> /lib/udev/rules.d.
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> I say keep them in /etc.
Do we flip a coin? :-)
Actually, I lean towards /lib/udev and I believe DJ and Dan
do as well. Does this sort of make it a non-un
Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
> There is a problem, however. The script uses open() but with 3 arguments
> instead of 2. From what I've found so far, this change in syntax was
> introduced in perl-5.8.0, so the installation of Linux Headers fails if
> the host's version of perl is < 5.8.0. I'm investi
Matthew Burgess wrote these words on 10/21/08 12:39 CST:
> Done, #2257. Targetted for 6.4.
This ticket is a duplicate of #2240. I've closed #2257 and have
had #2240 assigned to me. I'll be updating the book and closing
all my tickets as soon as my current build finishes, and I've
built a few BLF
Hi all,
I noticed in -book that DJ made some commits yesterday, but it
doesn't appear that the book rendered last night. At least the date
of the book wasn't bumped to the day DJ's commit says it should.
Also noticed on the Quantum server that there are over 1500 svnserve
processes. Is that norma
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 10/26/08 12:47 CST:
> DJ Lucas wrote:
>> Yeah. I forgot to bump the book version entity. I remembered around
>> 12:35 AM CDT, but I'm not sure if it was too late to bump it.
>
> 0415 MST.
So, why didn't the book get rendered last night?
>>> Also noticed on t
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 10/26/08 13:54 CST:
> I have no idea. It looks like Jeremy ran the script at 0859 MST today, but I
> have no evidence that it wasn't also run at 0415.
In fact, after I looked again later, I saw in
/srv/www/www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/svn that it had not
re
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 10/26/08 14:12 CST:
> Why do we do:
>
> make INSTALL_HDR_PATH=dest headers_install
> cp -rv dest/include/* /usr/include
>
> instead of:
>
> make INSTALL_HDR_PATH=/usr/include headers_install
I just asked that question a week ago! (and was answered)
Anyway, it's
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 10/26/08 14:28 CST:
> OK. I'll add a sentence to explain that.
Would you go ahead and assign yourself ticket #2167 as well?
( http://wiki.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/ticket/2167 )
--
Randy
rmlinux: [bogomips 3992.15] [GNU ld version 2.17] [gcc (GCC) 4.1.2]
[GNU C
Jeremy Huntwork wrote these words on 10/26/08 14:34 CST:
> Before you go changing anything, see here:
I didn't mean Bruce should actually change anything. My response was
more on the technical side in that if it *were* changed, the end
result of someone following the book would be identical to wh
Jeremy Huntwork wrote these words on 10/26/08 14:46 CST:
> Yeah, understood. I guess I probably sounded defensive. All I meant was
> there was a decision reached about this earlier and to my knowledge none
> of the technical circumstances have changed, so you'll probably want to
> give consider
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 10/26/08 16:32 CST:
> Greg Schafer wrote:
>> I've never looked at jhalfs but I understand it implements my ICA
>> algorithms. My own scripts have been getting exceptionally clean
>> results lately now that the randomness in GCC builds has apparently gone
>> as of GC
On 3/2/2014 4:31 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> The Linux From Scratch community is pleased to announce the release of
> LFS Version 7.5.
> [snip]
I would like to say that it pleases me that the LFS community is as
active as it is, and congratulations on another release of this fine
product. LFS is as a
Hi all,
Noted in the 5.34 Stripping section is this command:
rm -rf /tools/{doc,info,man}
However, /tools/doc does not exist after following the book. It is
this way both in the Testing and Unstable branches. I realize they've
been merged, just wanted to pass along this note as it probably is
in
Hi all,
I noticed in the patches project there's a patch for IPRoute2 named
free_error. There's a -1 and -2 version. Does anyone know if this
patch is scheduled for inclusion in the book, or is it some sort of
optional patch, to be used only if you encounter the error it fixes.
TIA for any inform
Jim Gifford wrote these words on 02/19/05 18:08 CST:
> Randy McMurchy wrote:
>>I noticed in the patches project there's a patch for IPRoute2 named
>>free_error. There's a -1 and -2 version. Does anyone know if this
>>patch is scheduled for inclusion in the book, o
Gerard Beekmans wrote these words on 02/19/05 19:15 CST:
> On February 19, 2005 05:37 pm, Randy McMurchy wrote:
>
>>Thanks for the info, Jim. Do you recommend using this new release of
>>IPRoute (2.6.10-050209), or sticking with the Unstable version and
>>using the patch?
The list of installed programs for the subject-labeled package is
not accurate for the version in SVN. This is just a heads-up in
case someone wants to update the book.
--
Randy
rmlinux: [GNU ld version 2.15.91.0.2 20040727] [gcc (GCC) 3.4.1]
[GNU C Library 2004-07-01 release version 2.3.4] [Lin
Gerard Beekmans wrote these words on 02/20/05 16:04 CST:
> On February 20, 2005 02:53 pm, Randy McMurchy wrote:
>
>>The list of installed programs for the subject-labeled package is
>>not accurate for the version in SVN. This is just a heads-up in
>>case someone
Noted in the Udev-050 instructions:
"This package does not come with a test suite."
This is not true any longer. Running 'make test' performs a test
suite of 110 individual tests.
--
Randy
rmlinux: [GNU ld version 2.15.91.0.2 20040727] [gcc (GCC) 3.4.1]
[GNU C Library 2004-07-01 release versio
Gerard Beekmans wrote these words on 02/20/05 18:34 CST:
> On February 20, 2005 03:17 pm, Randy McMurchy wrote:
>
>>Libol and syslog-ng don't have any program descriptions, lists,
>>diskspace used, dependencies or build times. Others that I don't
>>remember off-
[This will be my last post on this subject. I've expressed an
opinion, not to disparage, but to encourage technical excellence.
I'll reiterate some points in this post and leave it at that.]
Jeremy Utley wrote these words on 02/20/05 19:37 CST:
> This, IMHO, is a highly optimistic view. For each
Gerard Beekmans wrote these words on 02/20/05 21:52 CST:
> I won't dispute what you said. You laid out what the right thing is to do. It
> doesn't always get done unfortunately.
I said I wouldn't post again on this thread, so I changed the title
to reflect what my intention was in bringing this w
[cross-posted to lfs.dev]
Hi all,
I built up a new system recently and installed the newest DocBook
tools. DocBook XML DTD-4.4 and DocBook XSL Stylesheets-1.68.1.
Currently, the BLFS book lags behind with DTD-4.3 and
Stylesheets-1.67.2.
I've validated and rendered both LFS and BLFS using these
[cross-posted to hlfs.dev]
Hi all,
Looking at the INSTALL file in both the LFS and HLFS book, it has
instructions to install the FOP package. Two things about this.
1. It says that Apache-ANT is required, however, I'm not really sure
this is accurate. The required portions of ANT are included in
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 03/04/05 13:55 CST:
> Randy McMurchy wrote:
>> I would like to update both packages in BLFS to these versions.
>> Though the BLFS pages use the 4.3 DTD, simply using rewrite
>> statements in the catalog and docbook files works just fine.
>&
Attached you'll find a diff that will update the INSTALL file. Changes
are as follows:
1. Removed the mention of using the Tidy patch, as I included the
patch into the BLFS instructions.
2. Modified the stuff to render PDF to just point at the two packages
required to install from BLFS (J2SDK and
Attached you'll find a diff that will update the INSTALL file. Changes
are as follows:
1. Removed the mention of using the Tidy patch, as I included the
patch into the BLFS instructions.
2. Modified the stuff to render PDF to just point at the two packages
required to install from BLFS (J2SDK and
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 03/07/05 11:33 CST:
> Randy McMurchy wrote:
>> I need to create an 'lp' user for the CUPS instructions. I'm not
>> sure what to use as the home directory. I always use /var/spool/cups.
>>
>> However, /var/spool/cups
When using an LFS-6.0 host, with stripped binaries, the last step
in the chapter 5 Binutils instructions (rebuilding the ld
subdirectory) in the current SVN book will fail.
This is a known issue.
Two things:
1. Shouldn't this be explained in BIG BOLD text somewhere in the
prerequisites? With som
Randy McMurchy wrote these words on 03/07/05 18:10 CST:
> When using an LFS-6.0 host, with stripped binaries, the last step
> in the chapter 5 Binutils instructions (rebuilding the ld
> subdirectory) in the current SVN book will fail.
>
> This is a known issue.
>
> Two thin
Steve Crosby wrote these words on 03/07/05 20:12 CST:
> 1. build the initial binutils and gcc in chapter 5 using dynamic libs,
> rather than static (this avoids the stripped libc.a issue).
>
> 2. use binutils prior to 2.15.91.0.2 in the initial chapter 5 (this results
> in binutils ignoring the
Steve Crosby wrote these words on 03/07/05 23:09 CST:
> Bug 1061 created with suggested text (compiling binutils\gcc shared) - note
> that I haven't the experience with the toolchain to indicate if this is a
> "correct" fix, and since it's a toolchains issue, will need some serious
> brainpower
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 03/09/05 17:36 CST:
> My suggestion/preference is to do a quick 6.0.1 and release it this
> week. The only change is either one package version or some minor
> instruction changes. No change in gcc, glibc, or any other nice to have
> packages. Just the minimal nee
Jeremy Utley wrote these words on 03/09/05 00:51 CST:
> I don't see why not, but IMHO, it's far easier to just build the Pass1's
> dynamic instead of static - it sidesteps libc.a completely (uses libc.so
> instead), and definately works - I've used that process myself when
> building from jhuntwor
Steve Crosby wrote these words on 03/07/05 23:09 CST:
> Bug 1061 created with suggested text (compiling binutils\gcc shared) - note
> that I haven't the experience with the toolchain to indicate if this is a
> "correct" fix, and since it's a toolchains issue, will need some serious
> brainpower
Matthew Burgess wrote these words on 03/10/05 14:06 CST:
> No idea, sorry. NEWS and Changelog don't mention anything explicitly,
> it may be related to the various automake/libtool upgrades that the
> maintainer has carried out.
Apparently, the relevant lines from the install log show this:
cas
Hi all,
In the Chapter 6 instructions to build GCC, it says this:
"The full GCC package contains additional compilers. Instructions
for building these can be found at
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/svn/general/gcc.html.";
This is true enough. However, it's misleading. At this point in
Steve Crosby wrote these words on 03/12/05 17:48 CST:
> A 6.0.1 release could be done simply be modifying the "Stripping" chapter,
> to indicate you should *not* strip static libraries, as the strip command
> has a bug in it.
But that doesn't do a thing to fix a broken LFS. Making a release
sim
Matthew Burgess wrote these words on 03/12/05 13:36 CST:
> I finally got around to upgrading udev to version 054 tonight. This
> involves a new configuration file which is available at
> http://downloads.linuxfromscratch.org/udev-config-3.rules. It basically
> merges the other two files (the rul
Jeremy Utley wrote these words on 03/12/05 23:10 CST:
> I thought it was agreed that we would not modify the groups in LFS until
> one of two things was in place:
>
> a) Text was ready to go into the LFS book to explain the changes in the
> groups, and what the user needs to do to get back the fu
I am still seeing issues with the newest version of strip. Is anyone
else?
I went to build valgrind early today, and it bombed out because of
mismatched TLS symbols in libc.a. I'm almost certain I used the
newest binutils strip (SVN-20050303) to strip the binaries created
in SVN-20050312.
--
Ran
Hi all,
Noted in the installation instructions for IPRoute2 is a command
to install the findutils patch. However, this patch is not in the
repository or the list of needed patches.
I'm guessing because the patch was deliberately removed from the
list of patches, that it isn't needed any longer, b
Hi all,
In the installation text for linux-2.6.11.3, there's some text that
says "Kernel version 2.6.10 has a security vulnerability ..."
This text should be updated to properly reflect the version.
(noted that 2.6.11.4 is out and may contain the fix that the patch
fixes, rendering the patch unn
Hi all,
I just updated my LFS-SVN sandbox and noticed there were many changes
to the bootscripts.
But the version of the bootscript package didn't change.
How are folks supposed to know to download a new (changed) package
if the version number doesn't change?
I know I keep my sources local, and
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 03/18/05 16:00 CST:
> There's more. In shadow-4.0.7/etc/pam.d/ are lists of example pam
> files. Each one of the {user,group}{add,del,mod} have three entries:
>
> #%PAM-1.0
> # /etc/pam.d/groupadd
> authsufficient pam_rootok.so
> account
Nathan Coulson wrote these words on 03/18/05 17:25 CST:
> nobody has explained about setting the version anywhere, except
> tagging the svn to me...
>
> could you provide more information?
Perhaps I just had a brain fart when I sent my earlier message,
Nathan. Please disregard it. I'm not really
Archaic wrote these words on 03/21/05 08:54 CST:
> On a testing build of 20050318, lastlog will show the last tty a person
> logged in on, but shows "Never logged in". There is a patch in the
> patches repo:
Could you be more specific as to what is broken?
I get this when running lastlog:
[EMAIL
Archaic wrote these words on 03/21/05 09:38 CST:
> $ lastlog
> Username Port From Latest
> root tty4 **Never logged in**
> sshd **Never logged in**
> fcron **Never lo
Archaic wrote these words on 03/21/05 11:14 CST:
> Yes, on my old systems, starting a login shell via xterm worked. Try it
> from a console login.
Works for me. Note root's last login in my lastlog output was on tty1.
--
Randy
rmlscsi: [GNU ld version 2.15.94.0.2 20041220] [gcc (GCC) 3.4.3]
[G
Archaic wrote these words on 03/21/05 11:41 CST:
> Not necessarily. For instance, if I log in via ssh it updates the port
> and the time. If I then log in via a tty, I will see the time from the
> ssh login. A cursory glance may cause one to think it is working, since
> it shows a time, but the ti
Archaic wrote these words on 03/21/05 11:41 CST:
> Anyway, works for me doesn't really fix the situation. Did you deviate
> in anyway? I have a standard deviation that I have done for the last 2
> years as well as a 100% strict by-the-book build in which lastlog isn't
> recording tty times.
I jus
Randy McMurchy wrote these words on 03/21/05 12:38 CST:
> Archaic wrote these words on 03/21/05 11:41 CST:
>
>>Anyway, works for me doesn't really fix the situation. Did you deviate
>>in anyway? I have a standard deviation that I have done for the last 2
>>years as
Jim Gifford wrote these words on 03/21/05 18:34 CST:
> Randy, did you try the patch I posted???
No, I did not. I figured this is an LFS issue more than a BLFS
issue, so I just went ahead and installed PAM and re-installed
shadow without the patch. It works now.
I've not looked at any of the code
Jim Gifford wrote these words on 03/21/05 20:08 CST:
>
> Ok, I was just hoping you had that test system still in place.
I have tar files of an LFS-SVN-20050316 build and available partitions.
If you'd like I can create a new LFS in 10 minutes, then install
shadow with the patch to see what happen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote these words on 03/31/05 00:34 CST:
> linux-pam 0.77 ( 0.78 barfed )
I would be interested in knowing what exactly went wrong with the
Linux-PAM-0.78 installation.
--
Randy
rmlscsi: [GNU ld version 2.15.94.0.2 20041220] [gcc (GCC) 3.4.3]
[GNU C Library stable release ver
Jeremy Huntwork wrote these words on 04/01/05 11:12 CST:
> I think it's ready to go as well. It would nicely bring it all up-to-date
> and fix a few bugs, notably, the strip bug and the 2.6.8.1 cd-writing bug.
> I'd like to see a release happen now.
Probably best to delay it for a while, as a bra
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 04/14/05 14:08 CST:
> 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 m
John Gnew wrote these words on 04/15/05 18:14 CST:
> I have just come across the following change that I needed to make in
> order for glxgears to work:
>
> KERNEL="nvidia[0-9]*", GROUP="video"
> KERNEL="nvidiactl",GROUP="video"
> to
> KERNEL="nvidia[0-9]*", GROUP="video", MODE="0666"
> KERNE
TheOldFellow wrote these words on 04/16/05 14:12 CST:
> I had no difficulty building a reasonably stable gcc-4/glibc-2.3.5
> system that carried BLFS with just a few patches all the way up to a
> gnome build (with a few oddities in gnome, I admit, but that's usual
> with my gnome builds) plus the
Randy McMurchy wrote these words on 04/16/05 18:31 CST:
[snip]
Sorry, all, this was intended for blfs-dev and I didn't look close
enough at my cc: field before I sent it.
--
Randy
rmlscsi: [GNU ld version 2.15.94.0.2 20041220] [gcc (GCC) 3.4.3]
[GNU C Library stable release version
Dennis J Perkins wrote these words on 04/16/05 18:15 CST:
> I've been compiling some new versions of Gnome 2.10 packages and a few
> of them are looking for hal and dbus. I can turn off hal in most cases,
> but gnome-volume-manager appears to require hal.
>
> I have found and compiled hal and dbu
Original Message
Subject: Some questions to can start my work (long)
Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 23:51:24 +0200
From: M.Canales.es <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: BLFS Book Maintenance List
Organization: Poder para Tux !!!
To: blfs-book@linuxfromscratch.org
Hi.
I would start my work
Dennis J Perkins wrote these words on 04/16/05 18:15 CST:
> I've been compiling some new versions of Gnome 2.10 packages and a few
> of them are looking for hal and dbus. I can turn off hal in most cases,
> but gnome-volume-manager appears to require hal.
>
> I have found and compiled hal and dbu
John Gnew wrote these words on 04/16/05 21:01 CST:
> Listed are my timings from a build for LFS 6.1. This box has an AMD
> Sempron 3100 processor with 512MB.
>
> gcc-core-3.4.3 439.3 2.8
This particular entry seems almost impossible. This includes the build,
running the tests, an
Hi all,
It appears the BLFS book hasn't rendered for the last couple of
cycles. It appears stuck on the 4/16 changes. Is there anything in
the logs or elsewhere that may show what is going on?
I'm basing this on the fact the there are no mirrors current, as
well as Belgarath being behind.
--
Ra
Jim Gifford wrote these words on 04/18/05 16:03 CST:
> Another issue will be after the tools are built we will be building a
> cross-compiled kernel, so we can boot into the architecture we are
> building for and complete the build process. There are a few pitfalls to
> this.
> 1 - All sour
Jim Gifford wrote these words on 04/18/05 16:25 CST:
> Randy McMurchy wrote:
>>I mean, using the new method versus the current method, you still
>>end up with the same exact end product, right?
>
> Actually, you get a cleaner toolchain, from my experience with this
>
Jim Gifford wrote these words on 04/18/05 18:10 CST:
> There may be a simple resolution, since in the MIPS build and some
> of the other architecture that don't have keyboards and mice, we had to
> add SSL, and SSH. We could add them to the BOOK as core packages.
SSL/SSH != minimalistic
I
Jim Gifford wrote these words on 04/18/05 18:36 CST:
> Randy the message was posted a long time ago and no objections were
> noted. Here is the original post from Matt,
> http://archives.linuxfromscratch.org/mail-archives/lfs-dev/2005-February/050262.html,
>
> granted it was in a message about
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote these words on 04/18/05 21:55 CST:
> Please folks, have a bit of a think about how things actually work,
> or actually take a look at how it hangs together, before going off
> the deep end
Nobody's gone off the deep end, Ryan. We're just asking questions.
The LFS Editor wh
Jeremy Huntwork wrote these words on 04/18/05 22:40 CST:
> Ok, let's stop this right here. Are we really that incapable of carrying
> on intelligent conversation? Why the need to make things personal? And
> yes, I know Ryan directed his somewhat strong comments at you Randy, but
> come on... Is
Jeremy Utley wrote these words on 04/18/05 23:14 CST:
> Randy McMurchy wrote:
>>Please, Jim, for me and I'm sure there are others that want to know
>>the same thing, can you explain *in a technical manner* how the
>>toolchain could be any "cleaner"?
>
> A
Jeremy Huntwork wrote these words on 04/18/05 23:29 CST:
> My point was that in the banter between yourself
> and Ryan it looked as though things were quickly becoming unpleasant and when
> that happens the intelligence of these discussions always suffers. I don't
> know
> about you, or anyone el
Jeremy Utley wrote these words on 04/18/05 23:44 CST:
> There's a lot of plusses to this build, and very few downfalls, when you
> really sit down to think about it. Mentioning the need for the reboot
> was a good thing, but it's important to know WHY that becomes essential
> - because if we'r
Jeremy Utley wrote these words on 04/19/05 00:05 CST:
> Oh believe me, Randy. I build remotely too (I have my server in the
> datacenter, plus my home server that I only have access to via SSH), and
> even if the default position of the book was to take the reboot method,
> the chroot method co
Thomas Reitelbach wrote these words on 04/20/05 17:19 CST:
> "Shadow fails to update the time of last login as noted by lastlog command> when logging into a regular console. The Port (tty) column does get
> updated."
>
> Is the last sentence correct? Or should it be the negation "The Port (tty)
Archaic wrote these words on 03/30/05 16:43 CST:
> With the exception of the kernel changing every week, this book seems
> rock solid. Add to that the 5 months since lfs-6 was release and it
> seems it might be time to cut a testing branch?
I mentioned this same thing at the beginning of this mont
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 04/22/05 12:16 CST:
> Also, I need to write up the rationale for the zone attribte. For all
> the index entries except the first, we use a range with the start of the
> range as the beginning of the section. What this does is create a
> pointer in the index to th
M.Canales.es wrote these words on 04/22/05 12:37 CST:
> El Viernes, 22 de Abril de 2005 19:16, Bruce Dubbs escribiÃ:
>
>>I think you are saying that the sortas values throuout the book should
>>have the same case for each section. Right? Since we have started
>>making the a- sections upper case
Matthew Burgess wrote these words on 05/06/05 13:00 CST:
> Yep, the build completed without errors even without the
> --disable-docs-build specified.
Thanks, Matt. I will update the book to reflect your observations.
--
Randy
rmlscsi: [GNU ld version 2.15.94.0.2 20041220] [gcc (GCC) 3.4.3]
[G
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 05/15/05 18:42 CST:
> Matthew Burgess wrote:
>>As for flex, it looks
>>like the maintainers went AWOL again :(
>>http://sourceforge.net/projects/lex/ currently lists 30 open bugs, and
>>11 submitted patches yet to be applied. Maybe it would be prudent to
>>roll bac
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 05/15/05 18:53 CST:
> The editor's guide is just that: a guide. It's not a legal document.
> If an editor has what he thinks is a good reason to deviate, that's OK.
> We should all be trying to make the book as self-consistent as possible
> as well as consistent
Andrew Benton wrote these words on 05/16/05 14:45 CST:
> Matthew Burgess wrote:
>
>>Maybe it would be prudent to
>>roll back to 2.5.4a? At least that one manages to get doxygen to
>>compile successfully!
>
> Doxygen compiles fine for me. The problem compiling doxygen is introduced by
> the
>
Jim Gifford wrote these words on 05/23/05 16:15 CST:
> I would like to suggest we move flex into the BLFS book after the 6.0
> release, and remove flex from the Cross-LFS/Multi-arch book.
>
> Please list your comments as a go or no go.
I am against this idea. Flex is a tool used in the build pr
Jim Gifford wrote these words on 05/23/05 17:16 CST:
>>The only one I know if in BLFS is tetex. Correct me if I'm wrong.
>>
> That is require flex. A lot of developers are moving away from flex.
I can't (don't want to do the research) speak for "require". I can
however show that in many, many BLF
Jim Gifford wrote these words on 05/23/05 22:51 CST:
> What is the package isn't need for either BLFS or LFS, that's the
> question. I understand your concerns, but if it's only required for 2
> packages in BLFS, then is it worth being in LFS?
But Jim, your estimates are unreasonable. By my cou
Matthew Burgess wrote these words on 05/26/05 16:46 CST:
> Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
>
>>Keep it all on the same machine, but
>> change the chroot to a reboot section so that you can reboot into a
>>kernel that supports 64-bit. Where there is need to do that all on
>>another machine (an entirely d
Jim Gifford wrote these words on 05/27/05 01:48 CST:
> Would be great, but the RaQ series and few other designs don't have the
> ability to boot from a cdrom.That's why I'm persuing a method that is a
> little easier for people to work with on all systems. NFS root booting.
This is the future o
R.Quenett wrote these words on 05/27/05 09:15 CST:
> Pardon me for butting in here but, to me in my ignorance, the one
> benefit that would justify (again, to me - I'm not trying to speak
> for anyone else) almost anything would be the 'purity of the build'
> (which I understand to mean the new
Jeremy Huntwork wrote these words on 05/27/05 14:11 CST:
> Randy McMurchy wrote:
>
>>Thanks, David, for the report. I received private email from a
>>Gnumeric developer in response to my original message (one wonders
>>how he found the message, unless he monitors
Hi all,
I just finished rendering the cross-lfs book, as I tried to go to
the link Jim provided, but as Manuel pointed out, it is a bad URL.
Anyway, browsing through the books, I noticed that the RaQ2 build
instructions include building OpenSSL and OpenSSH. I must have missed
this discussion tota
501 - 600 of 1031 matches
Mail list logo
