Re: glibc install problem

2008-10-12 Thread Chris Staub
Chris Staub wrote: > Amitav Mohanty wrote: >> Hello >> >> I am trying to install LFS 6.2 on a core 2 duo 2 gigahertz system with a >> pata hard disk. In chapter 6 after installing the linux libc headers and >> man pages when I try to install glibc I got this error saying "cannot >> compute sizeof l

Re: glibc install problem

2008-10-12 Thread Chris Staub
Amitav Mohanty wrote: > Hello > > I am trying to install LFS 6.2 on a core 2 duo 2 gigahertz system with a > pata hard disk. In chapter 6 after installing the linux libc headers and > man pages when I try to install glibc I got this error saying "cannot > compute sizeof long double" when I run the

Re: glibc install problem

2008-10-12 Thread Randy McMurchy
Amitav Mohanty wrote: > I am trying to install LFS 6.2 Why are you trying to install such an ancient version of LFS on such a modern machine? Please try 6.3, or even better, try the Development version of the book which is due for release. There may be some issues with Development right now as t

glibc install problem

2008-10-12 Thread Amitav Mohanty
Hello I am trying to install LFS 6.2 on a core 2 duo 2 gigahertz system with a pata hard disk. In chapter 6 after installing the linux libc headers and man pages when I try to install glibc I got this error saying "cannot compute sizeof long double" when I run the configure script. I checked the a

Re: Making the LFS System Bootable

2008-10-12 Thread Randy McMurchy
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:)

Re: Making the LFS System Bootable

2008-10-12 Thread Trent Shea
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:). And configuring before in

Re: Making the LFS System Bootable

2008-10-12 Thread Trent Shea
On Sunday 12 October 2008 14:11:49 Trent Shea wrote: > It may be more robust if the previous bootloader was grub, and the > partition layout and setup were similar, but I've never actually > tried to see if this would work. Oh, I just re-read you said _after_ the mbr was altered... ignore my pos

Re: Making the LFS System Bootable

2008-10-12 Thread Trent Shea
On Sunday 12 October 2008 13:54:54 Wolfgang Messingschlager wrote: > What is your opinion? It may be more robust if the previous bootloader was grub, and the partition layout and setup were similar, but I've never actually tried to see if this would work. I wouldn't want to start altering instr

Re: Making the LFS System Bootable

2008-10-12 Thread Randy McMurchy
[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. > >

Making the LFS System Bootable

2008-10-12 Thread Wolfgang Messingschlager
Hi all, 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. What is your opinion? Wolfgang -- http://linuxfromscra

Re: SVN-20081011 Binutils-2.18 Tests

2008-10-12 Thread Trent Shea
On Sunday 12 October 2008 10:13:14 Randy McMurchy wrote: > But if you've already built Binutils, then don't worry about those > failures, as they are known and fixed upstream. Thanks for your time on this. I'm really just building to try and follow development and help test where I can. > Again,

Re: SVN-20081011 Binutils-2.18 Tests

2008-10-12 Thread Randy McMurchy
Trent Shea wrote these words on 10/12/08 11:33 CST: > The only patch I saw was related to texinfo, and it applied all three > times. Was there another patch? Yes. And my apologies. Somehow, I've neglected to get this into the book, which I'll fix right now. In the meantime, download and apply th

Re: SVN-20081011 Binutils-2.18 Tests

2008-10-12 Thread Trent Shea
On Sunday 12 October 2008 08:31:44 Randy McMurchy wrote: > We've added a patch to the Binutils installation to correct > this very issue. Perhaps you're overlooking the patch > installation? The only patch I saw was related to texinfo, and it applied all three times. Was there another patch? T

Re: SVN-20081011 Binutils-2.18 Tests

2008-10-12 Thread Randy McMurchy
Trent Shea wrote: > On Saturday 11 October 2008 22:39:07 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> And your errors are? > > < snip from logs > > Running /root/binutils-2.18/ld/testsuite/ld-shared/shared.exp ... > FAIL: shared (non PIC) > FAIL: shared (non PIC, load offset) > FAIL: shared (PIC main, non PIC so)

Re: SVN-20081011 Binutils-2.18 Tests

2008-10-12 Thread Trent Shea
On Saturday 11 October 2008 22:39:07 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > And your errors are? < snip from logs > Running /root/binutils-2.18/ld/testsuite/ld-shared/shared.exp ... FAIL: shared (non PIC) FAIL: shared (non PIC, load offset) FAIL: shared (PIC main, non PIC so) === ld Summary