--- Em dom, 6/1/13, Fernando de Oliveira escreveu:
> De: Fernando de Oliveira
> Assunto: Re: [lfs-support] can't compile gcc pass 1
>
> Data: Domingo, 6 de Janeiro de 2013, 9:09
> I agree with you. However, I think that there must be a way
> to reduce
> user problem
I think that really will help me remember. Thank you.
On Jan 7, 2013, at 2:50 AM, Simon Geard wrote:
> On Sun, 2013-01-06 at 09:06 -0500, Roy Birk wrote:
>> And I might have been better off copying and pasting. It's difficult to
>> tell the difference, in the book, between the number one and t
On Sun, 2013-01-06 at 09:06 -0500, Roy Birk wrote:
> And I might have been better off copying and pasting. It's difficult to
> tell the difference, in the book, between the number one and the letter
> L (lower case). I checked man pages and went with whichever seemed more
> sensible, but got it wro
On Sun, 2013-01-06 at 12:35 +0100, Tobias Gasser wrote:
> > AWK=`readlink -f /usr/bin/awk`
> > awk=/usr/bin/awk
> > [ "$AWK" == "/usr/bin/gawk" ] || die "$awk is not a symlink to gawk"
>
> some distros started to drop the /usr hierarchy
>
> the script should be a little smarter to accept the fil
On Sun, 2013-01-06 at 12:35 +0100, Tobias Gasser wrote:
> > AWK=`readlink -f /usr/bin/awk`
> > awk=/usr/bin/awk
> > [ "$AWK" == "/usr/bin/gawk" ] || die "$awk is not a symlink to gawk"
>
> some distros started to drop the /usr hierarchy
Out of curiosity, which ones? The only one I know that's me
And I might have been better off copying and pasting. It's difficult to tell
the difference, in the book, between the number one and the letter L (lower
case). I checked man pages and went with whichever seemed more sensible, but
got it wrong a couple of times with the -W1 option.
On Jan 6, 2
Simon Geard wrote:
> On Sat, 2013-01-05 at 11:39 -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>> The idea of the script was that it should be short. Generally the
>> problem is that the symlinks are not set and occasionally makeinfo is
>> not installed. Rarely is the problem an out-of-date executable.
> My issue wi
--- Em dom, 6/1/13, Tobias Gasser escreveu:
> De: Tobias Gasser
> Assunto: Re: [lfs-support] can't compile gcc pass 1
> Para: "LFS Support List"
> Data: Domingo, 6 de Janeiro de 2013, 8:35
>
> > AWK=`readlink -f /usr/bin/awk`
> > awk=/usr/bin/awk
>
--- Em dom, 6/1/13, Bruce Dubbs escreveu:
> De: Bruce Dubbs
> Assunto: Re: [lfs-support] can't compile gcc pass 1
> Para: "LFS Support List"
> Data: Domingo, 6 de Janeiro de 2013, 1:09
> Fernando de Oliveira wrote:
>
> > I like this. Output from
> >
> AWK=`readlink -f /usr/bin/awk`
> awk=/usr/bin/awk
> [ "$AWK" == "/usr/bin/gawk" ] || die "$awk is not a symlink to gawk"
some distros started to drop the /usr hierarchy
the script should be a little smarter to accept the files not only in
/usr/bin but just anywhere in $PATH
something like
On Sat, 2013-01-05 at 22:09 -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Here is another version. I can't say I really like it. The original is
> 40 lines and this is 73. All this because users either don't have
> enough experience to understand what's there now or because a user
> (generally experienced) jus
On Sat, 2013-01-05 at 11:39 -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> The idea of the script was that it should be short. Generally the
> problem is that the symlinks are not set and occasionally makeinfo is
> not installed. Rarely is the problem an out-of-date executable.
My issue with the script isn't whe
Fernando de Oliveira wrote:
> I like this. Output from
>
> $ cat /etc/lfs-release
> SVN-20120311
Here is another version. I can't say I really like it. The original is
40 lines and this is 73. All this because users either don't have
enough experience to understand what's there now or becaus
On 01/06/2013 02:39 AM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Tobias Gasser wrote:
>>> My error with this page, even after having built one or two versions of
>>> LFS, was that the last line:
>>>
>>> "gcc compilation OK"
>>>
>>> that made me ignore the other lines, when some of these lines were
>>> telling me that
--- Em sáb, 5/1/13, Bruce Dubbs escreveu:
> De: Bruce Dubbs
> Assunto: Re: [lfs-support] can't compile gcc pass 1
> Para: "LFS Support List"
> Data: Sábado, 5 de Janeiro de 2013, 21:24
> Tobias Gasser wrote:
> > Am 05.01.2013 18:39, schrieb Bruce Dubbs:
>
Tobias Gasser wrote:
> Am 05.01.2013 18:39, schrieb Bruce Dubbs:
>> The idea of the script was that it should be short. Generally the
>> problem is that the symlinks are not set and occasionally makeinfo is
>> not installed. Rarely is the problem an out-of-date executable.
>
> agree.
>
>
> so why
Am 05.01.2013 18:39, schrieb Bruce Dubbs:
> The idea of the script was that it should be short. Generally the
> problem is that the symlinks are not set and occasionally makeinfo is
> not installed. Rarely is the problem an out-of-date executable.
agree.
so why not check just the very importan
Chris Staub wrote:
> Also, I find it funny how often the sh -> dash issue is pointed out as
> an issue, yet to my knowledge it hasn't caused any actual problems for
> some time now. Makes me wonder if it's only there to verify whether
> users are really reading the book, rather than for any real,
On 01/05/2013 07:35 AM, Fernando de Oliveira wrote:
>
> I have recurrently written about this, here.
>
> My error with this page, even after having built one or two versions of
> LFS, was that the last line:
>
> "gcc compilation OK"
>
> that made me ignore the other lines, when some of these lines
Tobias Gasser wrote:
>> My error with this page, even after having built one or two versions of
>> LFS, was that the last line:
>>
>> "gcc compilation OK"
>>
>> that made me ignore the other lines, when some of these lines were
>> telling me that I had requirements to fix.
>>
>> I thought: "all rig
My error with this page, even after having built one or two versions of
LFS, was that the last line:
"gcc compilation OK"
that made me ignore the other lines, when some of these lines were
telling me that I had requirements to fix.
I thought: "all right, host can compile, so the other lines are
--- Em sáb, 5/1/13, Simon Geard escreveu:
> De: Simon Geard
> Assunto: Re: [lfs-support] can't compile gcc pass 1
> Para: lfs-support
> Data: Sábado, 5 de Janeiro de 2013, 8:40
> On Fri, 2013-01-04 at 19:11 -0600,
> Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> > matthew gruda wrote:
> >
On Fri, 2013-01-04 at 19:11 -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> matthew gruda wrote:
> > the output of the version check script is:
> >
> > bash, version 4.2.24(1)-release
> > /bin/sh -> /bin/dash
>
> Fix this.
Bruce (and others), I think some improvement needs to be made to the
Requirements page in the
matthew gruda wrote:
checking for MPFR... no
configure: error: libmpfr not found or uses a different ABI (including
static vs shared).
make[1]: *** [configure-mpc] Error 1
>
> and still getting the error
OK, you are not unpacking the tarballs properly. It's not finding mpfr.
That's explained
On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 8:11 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> matthew gruda wrote:
> > When I try to compile gcc from 5.5 I get this after running make:
> >
> > checking for complex.h... yes
> > checking for library containing creal... -lm
> > checking whether creal, cimag and I can be used... yes
> > che
matthew gruda wrote:
> When I try to compile gcc from 5.5 I get this after running make:
>
> checking for complex.h... yes
> checking for library containing creal... -lm
> checking whether creal, cimag and I can be used... yes
> checking for an ANSI C-conforming const... yes
> checking for size_t..
When I try to compile gcc from 5.5 I get this after running make:
checking for complex.h... yes
checking for library containing creal... -lm
checking whether creal, cimag and I can be used... yes
checking for an ANSI C-conforming const... yes
checking for size_t... yes
checking for gettimeofday...
27 matches
Mail list logo
