at every project that ever "forked" from LFS can and cannot do?
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:tus...@linuxfromscratch.org
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
On Wed, Dec 24, 2008 at 2:06 AM, Greg Schafer wrote:
> A mainstream build method suitable for a project like LFS needs to be
> simple, clean, robust and (sorry to be blunt) reasonably idiot-proof.
I didn't know LFSers were idiots! Thanks.
--
Tushar Teredesai
og files. After a package
removal I use rmdir -p on the usual directories (/usr, /bin, ...) to
remove all empty directories. If I need to keep a directory around
even if there are no files in it, I add a dot file in that directory.
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:tus...@linuxfromsc
devs would probably be offended if you called dash
"incomplete". I think one of the debian devs had a blog on the speedup
achieved by making their bootscripts use /bin/dash instead of
/bin/bash.
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:tus...@linuxfromscratch.org
http://www.linux
On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 2:55 AM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> With great sadness, I have to report the passing of Andy Benton.
>
This is really sad news. May God rest his soul in peace.
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:tus...@linuxfromscratch.org
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/
--
t be modified in
any way once you are in chroot.
I still don't understand the problem with using wrappers. They are an
elegant way of executing the compiler and linker with the switches
that we want. I don't agree with the "They are evil" statement. Yes,
if it is overused, it c
On 1/26/06, Jeremy Huntwork <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Tushar Teredesai wrote:
> > Why build something if you don't need to. ld --nostdlib -L/usr/lib
> > -L/lib works? It is not an undocumented switch.
>
> No, not exactly. At least not from my tests. The -Wl,--
On 1/26/06, Jeremy Huntwork <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Tushar Teredesai wrote:
> >
> > The dynamic linker path comes from gcc's specs file. You will need to
> > edit that or add --dynamic-linker=/lib/ld-linux.so.2 to the above
> > flags.
>
> It was sti
gust/052567.html>.
Do you have a ldconfig anywhere in your build script? If so replace it
by ldconfig -X and retry. It *should* fix the incorrect symlink.
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org
ke install
make install
ls -l /tmp/readline/lib
ldconfig -n /tmp/readline/lib
ls -l /tmp/readline/lib
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe
t. One way to find out is build lfs with
the snapshot:)
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
On 1/9/06, Tushar Teredesai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Some nitpicks related to the UTF-8 patch:
> * /usr/bin/zsoelim from groff is overwritten by man-db (three cheers
> for pkg-user hint:).
> * Mention that users can choose the man package instead of man-db
> (with a po
On 2/23/06, Greg Schafer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sigh.. even tho' jhalfs provides the facility to prevent this kind of
> damage, LFS unstable is still living up to its name :-(
Isn't that the point of having a revision control system and an unstable branch?
--
Tush
On 2/23/06, Tushar Teredesai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 2/23/06, Greg Schafer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Sigh.. even tho' jhalfs provides the facility to prevent this kind of
> > damage, LFS unstable is still living up to its name :-(
>
> Isn't
x27;echo $(ls)'
/bin/sh: syntax error at line 1: `(' unexpected
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
But, in this case, I think a note should suffice.
+1. For the book a note is sufficient. Though in my builds I do build
autotools during Ch 5 just so that I don't have to modify my scripts
if a patch comes up in the future that requires running the autotools.
--
Tushar Teredesai
may exist and may not
be owned by the user running the script.
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
On 3/8/06, Greg Schafer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Tushar Teredesai wrote:
>
> > Gentoo is using a script similar to the above script to sanitize the
> > headers.
>
> Do you have a pointer? Thanks.
>
The kernel-2.eclass file at
<http://www.gentoo.org/cgi-bin/
>. I
have an updated version on my workstation but it is inaccessible right
now since I am in the middle of a "house move".
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: ht
hat I will start adding the
information to the wiki.
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
They used to be shared at the begining. Check the archives couple of
years back on why they were separated. AFAIR, something to do with
having to release a new version just for BLFS changes.
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/
--
http://linuxfroms
ules files.
+1.
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
e went to a lot of work without even getting approval
from the Project Leaders. Best I can tell, neither the LFS nor
BLFS project leaders have approved the plan, much less like it.
Isn't that what cross-lfs is supposed to be;-) Cross == tangent.
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMA
From: Jaap Struyk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: May 25, 2006 7:02 AM
Subject: machine donation
To: Tushar Teredesai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Hello Tushar,
Sorry to mail to you directly but I'm not subscribed to any of the lfs
lists anymore but maybe I have something of the teams inter
ain the udev rules and bootscripts for LFS. All dependent projects
should work off that base and release their own additions (or
deletions in form of patches) - similar to how the bootscripts are
currently handled.
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/
o it with their
unique modifications. The approach has worked nicely for the
bootscripts, the same would work for udev rules.
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratc
rmal discussion route.
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
xities to be editors.
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
ackage.
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
the project co-lead.
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
ble to be sent upstream or
online magazines.
We install glibc and configure the linker cache. We also mention that
/lib and /usr/lib are automatically added to the linker path. But we
don't point to the part of the code which does that since that is not
relevant for us as system builders.
--
Tushar
ojects make a
simaltaneous release.
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
icient because of politics.
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
On 6/20/06, Dan Nicholson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
What do you guys think? I'm not closely attached to any details in
the script. It's just what seemed reasonable to me.
Just add a "cat ... EOF" to the commands that are in the current texinfo page.
--
Tushar
the next version.
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
The LFS releases are not that frequent. The average gap between
releases is 6-9 months.
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
is handled in the book. Install only the required
versions in /tools.
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
-n1
gawk --version | head -n1
gcc --version | head -n1
/lib/libc.so.6 | head -n1 | cut -d" " -f1-7
grep --version | head -n1
gzip --version | head -n1
cat /proc/version | head -n1 | cut -d" " -f1-3,5-7
make --version | head -n1
patch --version | head -n1
sed --version | he
) that introduced building a dynamically linked tool-chain in
$LFS/tools. A concept known as ICA was also introduced (search the LFS
lists for ICA for more info). This is essentially the current build
methodology.
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linuxfromscr
iles be downloaded initially nor should it suggest
where the source files should be moved finally.
--
Tushar Teredesai
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/
http://www.geocities.com/tushar/
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Hi:
I stumbled across this message
<http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-grep/2004-12/msg00064.html>
from the Grep maintainer. It seems that we should not be using the
above configure option.
--Tushar.
--
Tushar Teredesai
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/
http://www.geociti
On 6/14/05, Randy McMurchy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> It is my understanding that the full GCC-3.4.x tarballs no longer
> include the test suite.
The full tarball does contain the test suite.
--
Tushar Teredesai
http://www.linuxfromscratch.or
On 6/14/05, Archaic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ISTM --with-included-regex be kept for chapter 5, though. The reasoning
> would be a) can't depend on host's glibc, and b) we are using C locale.
Reason b is correct. But a is not. grep links against the glibc that
was built
no \
> --with-tclinclude=../tcl8.4.10
>
Option 3. Install the headers in /tools/include as per the directions
in BLFS instead of keeping the source tree around.
--
Tushar Teredesai
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/
http://www.geocities.com/tushar/
--
http://linuxfromscr
much about how accurate the
> SBU is, given it's a finger in the air, rough-guide anyway)
>
+1. My thoughts exactly, though I doubt if I could have said it so
appropriately.
--
Tushar Teredesai
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/
http://www.geocities.com/tushar/
--
INGUAS="it es"
>
Many moons ago I had tried this approach, but some packages failed
during compilation. I did not dig deeper. Found it was easier to just
remove the unwanted translations.
Maybe the situation has changed now.
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 6/24/05, Bernard Leak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> The 'add tempfile' patch for mktemp-1.5
> is pointlessly broken if using a separate build directory.
Good catch. Will update the patch.
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linuxfromscr
On 6/24/05, Tushar Teredesai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 6/24/05, Bernard Leak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > The 'add tempfile' patch for mktemp-1.5
> > is pointlessly broken if using a separate build directory.
>
> Good catch.
/usr/lib/libstdc++.la /usr/lib/libsupc++.la
>
> All .la's are now nice and clean and I find no problems, I'm happy.
>
> To me this seems a short-coming of the supplied ltmain.sh's. However I
> have not been successful hacking them.
Does anyone kn
also may want to do it. Is there an interest in
> patches to achieve this?
I personally don't see the benefits of compiling in a separate build
dir (since make clean/distclean usually do the job) but you are
welcome to submit patches to the patches project.
--
Tushar Teredesai
Note that only lfsers that stray from the book instructions need to
directly access the patches download directory so not many people may
be worried that the downloads look cluttered.
Note that I am not advocating keeping the patches around forever. Just
as long as they are useful erring on the sid
On 7/19/05, Joseph Felps <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 7/19/05, Tushar Teredesai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi:
> >
> > I would like to propose the following additional defines to xorg (and
> > xfree86?).
> >
> > #define ProjectRoot $PRE
ng other
hacks.
* It is only useful for package maintainers.
--Tushar.
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
&&
./configure --prefix="" --enable-zlib
make &&
make install
--Tushar.
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
c has its own implementation of iconv that is not compatible
with libiconv.
Perhaps we should have a note in the glibc instructions that libiconv
should not be installed since it is incompatible with glibc. CCing
lfs-dev for their consideration.
--
Tushar Teredesai
mail
On 7/23/05, Greg Schafer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Where is the development happening? I do not see it happening on the LFS
> lists.
I think the development happens on IRC coz I have not seen any major
discussion on the lists.
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMAIL PROTEC
On 7/24/05, Jim Gifford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> DJ Lucas wrote:
> >Randy McMurchy wrote:
> >>Tushar Teredesai wrote these words on 07/23/05 19:38 CST:
> >>>I think the development happens on IRC coz I have not seen any major
> >>>discussion
r a by-the-book LFS + BLFS installation it doesn't make
much sense to have multiple directories since there is only one
version of automake installed. That is the reason I symlink them on my
system.
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/
--
http
On 7/25/05, Randy McMurchy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Tushar Teredesai wrote these words on 07/25/05 01:37 CST:
>
> > My aplogies for that Randy. As I explained in my private e-mail (to
> > Randy), I was under the impression I was replying to a technical
> > di
or license notice. In my
> mind, this can mean one of three things:
>
> 1) It is under the same license as the mktemp package
> 2) It is under the same license as the LFS book
> 3) It has no license, and is thus not free software
>
> I guess (and hope) that the author (Tushar
On 7/25/05, Tushar Teredesai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 7/22/05, Henrik S. Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Robert Connolly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > I think everyone would agree that patches have the same copyright as
> > &g
IMO it would be better to tackle these large changes one at a
> time. Perhaps a LFS 6.3 with gcc-4 would be appropriate.
>
+1. Moving from gcc3 to gcc4 is not that big a deal and (IMO) does not
warrant a LFS version increment.
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMAIL PROT
option to the users? At the begining of LFS,
there can be a note stating that they could alias the commands if they
want verbose output.
alias cp "cp -v", ...
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/
On 7/28/05, Bruce Dubbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Please help me in welcoming Richard Downing (aka TheOldFellow) as a new
> BLFS Editor. Richard has been contributing to the lists since 2002 and
> will be a valuable asset to the BLFS Team.
Welcome abroad Richard.
--
T
On 7/28/05, Matthew Burgess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Tushar Teredesai wrote:
>
> > Perhaps we should have a note in the glibc instructions that libiconv
> > should not be installed since it is incompatible with glibc. CCing
> > lfs-dev for their consideration
biconv/. This library should not be
installed on a glibc based system glibc implements iconv
functionality. Installing libiconv on a glibc based system causes
problems when compiling some packages.
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/
--
a precedent :-)
Since the bash docs are on the official site, I think the precedent
will be a good thing.
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
dge Jim, Ryan, etal when the
branch becomes official.
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
he. Resolved :-) Sorry, could not resist, was just watching a
not so funny Indian movie with the above dialogue.
Now I will go back to BLFS since I am not qualified to post here.
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
able will link libz.a into the executable).
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
-4.x till a 4.1 release :-) So a branch sounds good to me.
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
wngrade.
I wish maintainers would start having version numbers that made sense :(
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emily_Litella
>
See that's why I didn't get it ;-) Anyways, she was on TV way before I
started watching.
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: ht
> removed and the libcurses.so -> libncurses.so symlink can be replaced
> with a simple linker script:
>
> rm libncurses.so.5
> rm libcurses.so
> echo 'INPUT(-lncurses)' >libcurses.so
Sounds good if testing does not reveal any problems.
>
> If t
eck will run configure again (twice actually) and overwrite
the files that were generated by "./configure --prefix=/usr && make".
Hence the standard way of building the tests is the one that Randy has
attached it the patch (i.e. run make check first, do a distclean
ld be revived). After formalizing, a
decision can be made whether the current packages fit that criteria or
not and then decide whether any new packages that are suggested fit in
that criteria. Of course there will always be exceptions to the rule
:-)
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 8/4/05, Jeremy Huntwork <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is it a common enough (ie, several mainstream distros include it by
> default) package to mandate that every LFS user build and install it?
Gentoo includes it by default (i.e. no use flags when compiling shadow).
--
Tush
ider the packages that are in the book at the moment,
My suggestion was not to base the rules based on the packages that are
currently in the book but first formalize and then see how the current
list of packages fit in. Else, each time a pacakge is suggested we go
thru the same sort of discussion.
The problem is that BLFS assumes that you have built *all* package in
LFS. So if you skip a package, you are a pariah when you post to
BLFS-support :-)
That is one reason I don't prefer packages being added to LFS, it
takes away the options.
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
danling
/usr/lib/libcurses.so symlink.
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
e never removed it, I don't think anything bad will
happen, the system messages won't get logged. The system will still
boot up properly.
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-d
On 8/5/05, Jeremy Huntwork <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Tushar Teredesai wrote:
> > FHS is good, not so sure about LSB since it mandates lot more packages
> > like PAM which are not in LFS.
>
> I didn't read this as "let's go to each of these lists and
uff from www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/svn/.
>
> Would this have affected the build in any serious way?
>
Nope, it won't affect the build at all. Because libtool is not used by
any of the packages unless you regenerate autotools.
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMAIL PROTEC
On 8/9/05, Randy McMurchy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Why don't we just add GNU Ghostscript into the book as well?
Good idea.
> I
> realize this is additional maintenance, but what the heck, if there
> are *Editors* using a package, it will stay maintained.
True :-
s used. For stable
releases, instead of using naming it 2.2.26, they use stable-20050429.
IMO we should use their terminology. Two reasons:
(1) We are not at odds with the versioning scheme they use.
(2) No one will report the General Releases as version increments.
--
Tushar Teredesai
ic or static. I
am running a build without the dynamic. Lets see what the difference
is.
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscr
are not installed on my system. So
someone who keeps these files around should confirm the above.
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Uns
find these fields useful, I propose moving
them below the changelog entries or moving them to a separate page.
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
"What's New" page would be useful, leaving the far too
> inquisitive reader to peruse the more detailed changelog if they so
> desire.
+1.
> As it's all related to changes made to the book though, I
> personally think they should remain together. Obviously it&#x
On 8/20/05, Bruce Dubbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> BTW, reexamining the subject line, if inetutils is removed, where is
> ping installed?
How about the original ping <http://ftp.arl.mil/~mike/ping.html>? :)
Hopefully it still compiles cleanly and works.
--
Tushar Teredesa
re are no plans to remove inetutils, we might was well keep
the utils such as ftp and telnet that it current installs.
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromsc
On 8/20/05, Matthew Burgess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Tushar Teredesai wrote:
>
> > BTW, if there are no plans to remove inetutils, we might was well keep
> > the utils such as ftp and telnet that it current installs.
>
> But that was one of the reasons I was
ell-deserved break now!
>
We were on break for the last couple of weeks :) So now it is B2W.
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
-rc-scripts-2005-08-31.tar.bz2>
for the script or see the untared contents in
<http://linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/downloads/tt-rc-scripts-2005-08-31/>.
Have fun.
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mail
d during the make phase.
One small gripe, in rare cases I have seen packages that *require* a
particular package but the configure does not fail if the dependency
is not found. But the make stage fails because it fails to find the
headers/libs!
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 8/31/05, Tushar Teredesai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sorry for the late reply, still going thru some old mail that I
> received while on vacation.
>
> On 8/25/05, Randy McMurchy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > ldd in-of-itself is no indication that a
branch should work in both UTF-8 and traitional locales. So, patches
> that make things work in UTF-8 but break the non-UTF-8 case are a no-go.
Are there plans to incorporate UTF-8 support into LFS and BLFS?
--
Tushar Teredesai
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linuxfromscratch
On 8/31/05, Matthew Burgess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Tushar Teredesai wrote:
>
> > Are there plans to incorporate UTF-8 support into LFS and BLFS?
>
> I'd like us to see at least how feasible such support would be. LFS
> doesn't look too bad, though I&#x
agement stuff GNOME may do) can update for
> changes in the filesystem.
>
> Thanks for replying though. Do you have any idea what the best
> solution I have to fix this? We gotta do something, we just can't
> leave the book broken.
>
Move to gamin <http://www.gnome.or
> programs that GNOME doesn't use by default).
The package I mentioned, gamin is a fully compatible replacement to
fam and from a GNOME developer. AFAIK, no changes are required to any
package to make it use gamin instead of fam. Check out
<http://www.gnome.org/~veillard/gamin/diffe
1 - 100 of 205 matches
Mail list logo
