Alice Wonder wrote:
> On 5/16/2013 2:08 PM, alex lupu wrote:
>
>>
>> BTW, a "patch" is mostly in the eye of the beholder; some call many of
>> them, "sed".
>>
>>
>
> Cute, I like it.
> Submitting sed scripts upstream though seems
Ken Moffat wrote:
> On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 09:44:50PM +0200, Aleksandar Kuktin wrote:
>>> On Thu, 16 May 2013 15:22:19 -0300
>>> Fernando wrote:
>>>
>>> I have sent this in the morning, about 7 hours ago, it never appeared.
>>>
>>> Now, I have edited some words to see if the anti-spam was blockin
On 5/16/2013 2:08 PM, alex lupu wrote:
>
> BTW, a "patch" is mostly in the eye of the beholder; some call many of
> them, "sed".
>
>
Cute, I like it.
Submitting sed scripts upstream though seems to be frowned upon, they
like patches.
I agree with the conce
Hi Aleksandar,
You wrote (excerpt):
I just went back to analyze the bug report and your fix that you
reported in the mail, and the only logical explanation is that your (or
any LFS') copy of db2html did something different than the developers
copy of db2html. If db2html is generated during the bui
On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 09:44:50PM +0200, Aleksandar Kuktin wrote:
> >On Thu, 16 May 2013 15:22:19 -0300
> >Fernando wrote:
> >
> > I have sent this in the morning, about 7 hours ago, it never appeared.
> >
> > Now, I have edited some words to see if the anti-spam was blocking
> > them.
>
> It a
Em 16-05-2013 16:44, Aleksandar Kuktin escreveu:
>> On Thu, 16 May 2013 15:22:19 -0300
>> Fernando wrote:
>>
>> I have sent this in the morning, about 7 hours ago, it never appeared.
>>
>> Now, I have edited some words to see if the anti-spam was blocking
>> them.
>
> It arrived for me, as well as
gt;
I prefer sed for minor changes that don't really affect how the program
operates but maybe fix a build (or sometimes just make install) issue
and patches for bug fixes that are a result of coding bugs.
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfr
Ken Moffat wrote:
> I don't think that worrying over the need for patches is a good
> use of time
I agree with this, but remember the slogan of LFS. 'Your distro, your
rules'. Users are free to use patches or not. The thing to remember is
that the LFS editors don
Le 16/05/2013 20:22, Fernando a écrit :
> I have sent this in the morning, about 7 hours ago, it never appeared.
Actually, I got it at 12:38 (western European time),
while the one where you added the above sentence
arrived at 20:22. Both are on gmane too...
Regards
Pierre
--
http://linuxfromscra
>On Thu, 16 May 2013 12:37:21 -0400
>alex lupu wrote:
>
> Am 16.5.2013 03:03, schrieb Stefan & Rebekka Wetter:
> > I wonder, why these patches are needed?
> > Are the upstream-sources not able to be compiled without?
>
> Good questions (as they say). While tr
>On Thu, 16 May 2013 15:22:19 -0300
>Fernando wrote:
>
> I have sent this in the morning, about 7 hours ago, it never appeared.
>
> Now, I have edited some words to see if the anti-spam was blocking
> them.
It arrived for me, as well as the follow-up email.
Perhaps Yahoo is also using the echo-
I have sent this in the morning, about 7 hours ago, it never appeared.
Now, I have edited some words to see if the anti-spam was blocking them.
Mensagem original
Assunto: Re: [lfs-support] why does LFS need that number of patches
Data: Thu, 16 May 2013 07:38:49 -0300
De
it if it solves the problem - from time to time people point
out that a sed will do the same job ;)
For LFS, I try to do the same as the book.
I don't think that worrying over the need for patches is a good
use of time : there are all sorts of packages - some mostly get
tested on osx or a BSD
Am 16.5.2013 03:03, schrieb Stefan & Rebekka Wetter:
> I wonder, why these patches are needed?
> Are the upstream-sources not able to be compiled without?
Good questions (as they say). While trying to stay on topic,
I'll take the liberty and rephrase them to
Why are patches nee
Em 16-05-2013 06:30, Alice Wonder escreveu:
> On 5/16/2013 12:03 AM, Stefan & Rebekka Wetter wrote:
...
>> in the lfs-book you need some patches. I wonder, why
...
> The number of patches in LFS is very small compared to the number of
> patches in any Linux distributi
On 5/16/2013 12:03 AM, Stefan & Rebekka Wetter wrote:
> Hi,
>
> in the lfs-book you need some patches. I wonder, why these patches are
> needed? Are the upstream-sources not able to be compiled without?
>
> Thanks!
>
> Best Regards
> Stefan
>
The number of patche
On Thu, 2013-05-16 at 09:03 +0200, Stefan & Rebekka Wetter wrote:
> Hi,
>
> in the lfs-book you need some patches. I wonder, why these patches are
> needed? Are the upstream-sources not able to be compiled without?
Depends on the patch. Some are upstream fixes not yet in an
Hi,
in the lfs-book you need some patches. I wonder, why these patches are
needed? Are the upstream-sources not able to be compiled without?
Thanks!
Best Regards
Stefan
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe
/30/2012 3:06 PM, Wayne Sallee wrote:
>>> Do the downloads of 3.2. All Packages, and 3.3.
>>> Needed Patches go into $LFS/sources ?
>>>
>>> Wayne Sallee
>>> wa...@waynesallee.com
>> YES. Did you miss reading the introduction and first part of ch
ages, and 3.3.
>> Needed Patches go into $LFS/sources ?
>>
>> Wayne Sallee
>> wa...@waynesallee.com
> YES. Did you miss reading the introduction and first part of chapter 3?
> It says so right there, unless you were skimming, which should not be
> happening if this
On 6/30/2012 3:06 PM, Wayne Sallee wrote:
> Do the downloads of 3.2. All Packages, and 3.3.
> Needed Patches go into $LFS/sources ?
>
> Wayne Sallee
> wa...@waynesallee.com
YES. Did you miss reading the introduction and first part of chapter 3?
It says so right there, unless yo
Do the downloads of 3.2. All Packages, and 3.3.
Needed Patches go into $LFS/sources ?
Wayne Sallee
wa...@waynesallee.com
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
On Apr 10, 2012 8:19 AM, "gmspro" wrote:
>
> @bruce,
>
> I meant, do the lfs devs write patches? Or, do they just get the patches
from somewhere else and store/mirror there
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/patches/lfs/7.1/
>
>
@gmsamature
Yes and yes
--
http://
@bruce,
I meant, do the lfs devs write patches? Or, do they just get the patches from
somewhere else and store/mirror there
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/patches/lfs/7.1/
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
On Apr 9, 2012 11:44 PM, "gmspro" wrote:
>
> @bruce,
>
> >>Yes.
>
> >> -- Bruce
>
> Yes for what? Yes for 'Or do they copy patches somewhere and store there
in that mirror?' or Yes for 'Do some particular lfs devs write these
patches
@bruce,
>>Yes.
>> -- Bruce
Yes for what? Yes for 'Or do they copy patches somewhere and store there in
that mirror?' or Yes for 'Do some particular lfs devs write these patches?
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/patches/lfs/7.1/ '
--
http://linuxfromscratch.
On Mon, 09 Apr 2012 16:22:57 +0100
gmspro wrote:
> Do some particular lfs devs write these patches?
> http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/patches/lfs/7.1/
>
> Or do they copy patches somewhere and store there in that mirror?
The lfs patches are in a subversion repository. Some of them
gmspro wrote:
> Do some particular lfs devs write these patches?
> http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/patches/lfs/7.1/
>
> Or do they copy patches somewhere and store there in that mirror?
Yes.
-- Bruce
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-suppo
Do some particular lfs devs write these patches?
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/patches/lfs/7.1/
Or do they copy patches somewhere and store there in that mirror?
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the
> Kernel newbies is usually found in google search such as kernel 2.6.33
> and writes about that http://kernelnewbies.org/Linux_2_6_33
Thanks, linuxfan, exactly the sort of thing I was looking for and
hadn't found yet. Doesn't look like my old desktops have any
burning need
Philippe Delavalade wrote:
> Le vendredi 13 novembre à 19:30, Philippe Delavalade a écrit :
>> Le vendredi 13 novembre à 16:25, Jonathan Arnold a écrit :
>>> I'm working through LFS SVN-20091112 and for the temporary system in Chapter
>>> 5, I've noticed a
Le vendredi 13 novembre à 19:30, Philippe Delavalade a écrit :
> Le vendredi 13 novembre à 16:25, Jonathan Arnold a écrit :
> > I'm working through LFS SVN-20091112 and for the temporary system in Chapter
> > 5, I've noticed a few unapplied patches that wget-list downloads
Le vendredi 13 novembre à 16:25, Jonathan Arnold a écrit :
> I'm working through LFS SVN-20091112 and for the temporary system in Chapter
> 5, I've noticed a few unapplied patches that wget-list downloads and was
> wondering if they should be, or if they just aren't appl
I'm working through LFS SVN-20091112 and for the temporary system in Chapter
5, I've noticed a few unapplied patches that wget-list downloads and was
wondering if they should be, or if they just aren't applied because
it is just the temp system? These include:
coreutils-7.6-i18n-1.
On Thu, 14 Aug 2008 03:29, Daniel Corda wrote:
> I have alittle problem wired dhcp work fine but I am not ususally near an
> ethernet prot during the day and I have a T60 with the 3945ABG wireless
> adapter after going to intes site and donwloading the kernel patch and
> attempting to install it I
I have alittle problem wired dhcp work fine but I am not ususally near an
ethernet prot during the day and I have a T60 with the 3945ABG wireless
adapter after going to intes site and donwloading the kernel patch and
attempting to install it I have his a snag when a I modprobe the module
to see if
On Fri, Feb 16, 2007 at 12:59:26PM -0500, TIM MOORE wrote:
> I am running LFS 4.0 still. I was wondering if anyone has posted what
> needs to be done to update my server to reflect the new DayLights
> Savings Time changes. Is there a DST patch available for LFS?
>
> /etc/lfs:
> Linux From Scratc
I am running LFS 4.0 still. I was wondering if anyone has posted what
needs to be done to update my server to reflect the new DayLights
Savings Time changes. Is there a DST patch available for LFS?
/etc/lfs:
Linux From Scratch, release 4.0
--build with lfs-install 4.0.3
Hey, thanks guys, I just used sed to fix the patches (first time I did
that) I'll try to
pay more attention if I run in to it again. I was mostly concerned
with compatibilities.
On 1/7/07, Jim Gifford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> A lot of these patches can be applied even thou
A lot of these patches can be applied even though the version referenced
in the patch is an older version. There is no sense re-inventing the
wheel if the current patch works.
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
On Monday 08 January 2007 01:36, Zeb Packard wrote:
> coreutils-5.96-suppress_uptime_kill_su-1.patch
>
> looks for 'coreutils-5.94/src/Makefile.in'
>
> It asks me for the file to patch then I tell it to look for v 5.96 and
> all is ok.
On the first hand, you're right and it should be "5.96".
On
I'm not sure if this is the right place to post this, but the patches
I got for coreutils are generally failing to find the right files.
It's not a big problem (I don't think) it just seems like the patches
point to the wrong version. For instance
coreutils-5.96-suppress_uptime_
Ken Moffat wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 29, 2006 at 09:49:49AM -0700, IsomerX wrote:
>
>> On 12/28/06, Ken Moffat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> In the past, people have occasionally managed to download patches
>>> under the wrong names (e.g. one patc
On Fri, Dec 29, 2006 at 09:49:49AM -0700, IsomerX wrote:
> On 12/28/06, Ken Moffat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > In the past, people have occasionally managed to download patches
> > under the wrong names (e.g. one patch saved to two names). I guess
> > you've ru
On 12/28/06, Ken Moffat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In the past, people have occasionally managed to download patches
> under the wrong names (e.g. one patch saved to two names). I guess
> you've ruled that out by using the LiveCD, but if you still get
> problems, look at
then went about building it. I don't really want to leave out
> one of the patches from Kbd though.
>
> Why are these refusing to patch, and can anyone think of something to
> do to correct the problem?
>
> IsomerX
This sounds as if you tried to (re-)apply a patch. Try de
ected!" I attempted to work around it by
leaving out the -N, and answering n, then y, but all the hunks
FAIL(ED). I didn't worry about bzip, I just applied the security
patch, then went about building it. I don't really want to leave out
one of the patches from Kbd though.
Why ar
Alan Lord wrote:
Arden wrote:
I don't know if I have all the knowledge necessary to complete ....
Patches are (almost always) applied *before* you do the configure,
make, make install stages. I would say that the make install stage in
when you install the package so I think
Arden wrote:
I don't know if I have all the knowledge necessary to complete LFS but I
want to give it a go. My question is ; Should the patches be applied
immediately after installing a package? The book isn't quite clear.
Thanks. Arden
Hi Arden,
I'm not quite sure what you
I don't know if I have all the knowledge necessary to complete LFS but I
want to give it a go. My question is ; Should the patches be applied
immediately after installing a package? The book isn't quite clear.
Thanks. Arden
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-s
Dear Sir / Madam,
We would like to take this opportunity to introduce ourselves as one of
leading manufacturer cum exporter of Hand Embroidered Items Badges,
Emblems, Crests, Insignia, Regalia, Sashes, Pennants, WW2 Items,
Patches, Family Crests, Coat of Arms, Bands, Flags, Ranks
On 6/27/05, Joern Abatz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I happened to search for 'bash' once on freshmeat.net, hit no.8 was
> 'Gnu bash', the download location is ftp.cwru.edu/pub/bash, and there
> are 16 patches there. I think maybe the download location in t
I happened to search for 'bash' once on freshmeat.net, hit no.8 was
'Gnu bash', the download location is ftp.cwru.edu/pub/bash, and there
are 16 patches there. I think maybe the download location in the book
is just not mirroring the directory. So it might actually be
bash-3
7;t comment, I didn't build 6.0 and I haven't used fedora as a
host.
> can i use gcc-3.4.3 with binutils-2.15.91.0.2 or i have to go along
> with 6.1 toolchain?
>
The "safer" way is to use all of the package versions from 6.1 (because
they've been tested together,
s a comment on lkml a few weeks ago about HJL's binutils
> patches, but I don't recall what the consensus was. As to 'safe',
> without extensive testing, the best you can ever say is "works for me".
please can you elaborate on what you said Ken..i didnt under
On Wed, 15 Jun 2005, Chakkaradeep C C wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> > Heh, last time I looked at an SRPM was for X.org, just after the gentoo
> > patches picked up a ton of stuff from RedHat - from memory, many of
> > those patches were very old and for very obscure hardware (and
Hi all,
> Heh, last time I looked at an SRPM was for X.org, just after the gentoo
> patches picked up a ton of stuff from RedHat - from memory, many of
> those patches were very old and for very obscure hardware (and none of
> them solved my problem). But, if the big-name rpm dis
On Wed, 15 Jun 2005, Chakkaradeep C C wrote:
> hi all,
>
> after using lfs for a whileam very much pleased with its
> performance.now i want to explore things...mainly bug fixes for each
> version of the tool....is the patches provided with lfs (am using
> lfs 6.0) makes
hi all,
after using lfs for a whileam very much pleased with its
performance.now i want to explore things...mainly bug fixes for each
version of the toolis the patches provided with lfs (am using
lfs 6.0) makes the bugs fixed in that tool?.or is that i can find
patches and patch
59 matches
Mail list logo
