On Fri, Dec 02, 2005 at 12:59:44PM +0530, Mukesh Kaushal wrote:
> Congrats to all of the members of the LFS team. This is really a great
> achievement for us.
1) What were you thinking cross-posting the reply?
2) Learn to trim the quotes.
3) Don't top post.
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/#ne
Congrats to all of the members of the LFS team. This is really a great
achievement for us.
" Gossip is like a photograph. It starts with a negative, then is developed
and enlarged"
---
Regards
Mukesh Kaushal
- Original Message -
From: "Justin R. Knierim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Devel
The LFS LiveCD Team is proud to announce the release of the x86-6.1.1-1
version of the LFS LiveCD. This version is built using LFS 6.1.1 and
BLFS packages from the svn branch. Packages for LFS 6.1.1 are included
on the LiveCD. Other new features:
* XFCE Terminal with helpful menus, includi
Hi Hari,
> Why don't you just use the LiveCD?
Oh, yes. I have LFS-LiveCD 6.1-3 here. I can't remember exactly
whether it is necessary to intall it on the HD. OR just run it on the
PC to install LFS on the empty HD, preformatted. I suppose I saw
this posting before, installing LFS direct fro
On 12/2/05, Stephen Liu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is there any other recommendation? OR is there any opinon on this
> newly released Slackware 10.2.
Why don't you just use the LiveCD?
Miken
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/
Hi Richard and folks,
> IIRC, Fedora patches the hell out of GCC-4 so that it isn't a regular
> GCC-4 anymore. I don't feel up to searching out all the threads on
> this. I think the best advice is still 'Don't build LFS from FC-4'.
>
> R.
I'm prepared to have another round on building LFS -->
On 12/1/05, Jeremy Monnet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Here is my configure :
> ./configure --prefix=/usr \
> --with-default-mozilla-five-home=/usr/lib/firefox-1.5 \
> --with-user-appdir=.firefox \
> --with-system-zlib \
> --with-system-png \
>
To accompany the recently released LFS-6.1.1, the ALFS team is proud to
announce the release of the LFS-6.1.1 ALFS profile.
The profile can be downloaded from the usual location
(/alfs/downloads/profiles/lfs/stable/profile-LFS-6.1.1.tar.bz2)
All comments, questions and discussion of this profile
Alan Lord wrote:
Chris Staub wrote:
Please ignore my previous post - I'm just plain stupid at 08:30am. Of
course they are different - GCC4 v GCC 3 just for starters.
Sorry for the noise.
Al
Nope. Have you looked at the book and read the Changelog?
I used the development SVN, which is WA
Gerard Beekmans wrote:
Hey guys,
Just wondering who else has been getting these. I have a /24 IP space
that seems to be targeted lately for sshd bruce force attacks. I can't
seem to keep up with firewalling the bad guys out. Luckily there's no
such thing as weak passwords on the servers I ha
On Thu, 01 Dec 2005 10:04:50 -0500
Jeremy Huntwork <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Andrew Benton wrote:
>
> > Bing. You hit the nail on the head there. As Richard said, Fedora Core 4
> > isn't a suitable distro to build the stable version of the book. It
> > should work OK for the development vers
Andrew Benton wrote:
Bing. You hit the nail on the head there. As Richard said, Fedora Core 4
isn't a suitable distro to build the stable version of the book. It
should work OK for the development version but that may not be suitable
if it's your first attempt at LFS. I've had good results bui
Syòndil Boscoverde wrote:
Instead, if I execute the same command ('tar -zxvf
bin...tar.gzip') as root, everything goes ok.
any help?
thanks.
This is not a LFS issue, this is a general Linux issue. The fact that
you're asking for help on this point reveals that you haven't met the
LFS prereq
Chris Staub wrote:
Please ignore my previous post - I'm just plain stupid at 08:30am. Of
course they are different - GCC4 v GCC 3 just for starters.
Sorry for the noise.
Al
Nope. Have you looked at the book and read the Changelog?
I used the development SVN, which is WAY different.
Al
On Tue, 29 Nov 2005 18:48:43 +
"S. Anthony Sequeira" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-11-29 at 18:54 +, Cedric wrote:
> >
> > I have some files i want to have available on both
> > windows and linux. As windows is not able to access ext3
> > partitions i have made a
Kevin Barnard wrote:
OK I thought I'd try to run through the LFS install. I'm using a
basic Fedora Code 4 host minimal install with a few extra RPMs so I
can build.
Binutils pass 1 makes and installs but I get the following when I try
to create a LIB_PATH version of ld. The same basic error ha
Alan Lord wrote:
Alan Lord wrote:
Hi,
I have just built (last night) a JHALFS build from SVN 271105. Is
there any [much] difference between that version and 6.1.1?
Thanks
Alan
Please ignore my previous post - I'm just plain stupid at 08:30am. Of
course they are different - GCC4 v GCC
Hi all,
I followed the procedure of creating a brand-new
account named 'lfs', and I tried to unpack the
binutils source code (.tar.gz) using its privileges.
Unfortunately, I've got the following error:
tar: gzip: Cannot exec: Too many levels of symbolic
links
tar: Error is not recoverable: exiting
On Thu, 2005-12-01 at 04:46 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Nov 2005, Matthew Burgess wrote:
>
> > The Linux From Scratch community is pleased to announce the release of LFS
> > 6.1.1. This release includes fixes for all known errata since LFS-6.1 was
> > released 4 months ago.
>
>
On Wed, 30 Nov 2005, Matthew Burgess wrote:
The Linux From Scratch community is pleased to announce the release of LFS
6.1.1. This release includes fixes for all known errata since LFS-6.1 was
released 4 months ago.
And there was much rejoicing!
Steven
--
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mail
On Thu, 1 Dec 2005 00:15:36 -0600
Kevin Barnard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> OK I thought I'd try to run through the LFS install. I'm using a
> basic Fedora Code 4 host minimal install with a few extra RPMs so I
> can build.
This is a FAQ. FC4 isn't a suitable host distro.
Read FAQ. Search ar
Alan Lord wrote:
Hi,
I have just built (last night) a JHALFS build from SVN 271105. Is there
any [much] difference between that version and 6.1.1?
Thanks
Alan
Please ignore my previous post - I'm just plain stupid at 08:30am. Of
course they are different - GCC4 v GCC 3 just for starter
Matthew Burgess wrote:
The Linux From Scratch community is pleased to announce the release of
LFS 6.1.1. This release includes fixes for all known errata since
LFS-6.1 was released 4 months ago.
You can read the book online at
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/6.1.1/ or download it fro
On 11/30/05, Chris Staub <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Micheal E Cooper wrote:
> > Are the defaults in the `make menuconfig` stage (the kernel configuration
> > menu) OK or do I have to modify something to make this a "completely
> > non-modular kernel configuration"?
> >
> > For example, "Loadable
24 matches
Mail list logo
