Szabolcs Gyalókay wrote:
>
> gcc res_hconf.c -c -std=gnu99 -fgnu89-inline -O2 -Wall -Winline
> -Wwrite-strings -fmerge-all-constants -g -Wstrict-prototypes
> -DIS_IN_nscd=1 -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2
> -fpie
> -fstack-protector
> -DNOT_IN_libc=1
> -o /sources/glibc-build/nscd/res_hconf.o -MD -M
Baho Utot wrote:
> I would like to download the LFS-6.4 version of the book but it is
> missing from the download section
>
> http://archive.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs-museum/
>
> Is it still available?
Just a minor permissions problem. Both 6.3 and 6.4 are accessible now.
-- Bruce
--
http:
Peeyush Chandel wrote:
> LinkedIn
User removed.
-- Bruce
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
stosss wrote:
> If I compile the kernel with 64GB instead of 4GB on a 32-bit system
> that would allow me to use more than 4GB of physical RAM. Is my
> understanding correct?
Maybe. It depends on your hardware. If it's supported in HW, the
kernel will do the equivalent of changing segments when
Raj wrote:
> on issuing the command grub> kernel /boot/grub/core.img i get the error
>
> unknown command kernel
>
> what should i do.
It sounds like you already have GRUB2 installed. Try
multiboot /boot/grub/core.img
-- Bruce
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
Andrew Benton wrote:
> On 12/04/10 14:45, mas...@mail.com wrote:
>> Hi i got this error when i tried to boot in to my LFS system.
>> could it be that my fstab is screwed up, or is it something i forgot to
>> do with the kernel?
>
> It's definitely nothing to do with fstab, quite possibly something
Simon Geard wrote:
> Anyone here had tried building LFS with the newly released gcc 4.5? Just
> tried, using the same basic instructions as for current LFS (barring the
> addition of MPC to GMP and MPFR), but get the following partway through
> the 'make' step:
>
> checking for library containing
Franz L. Kuhlmann wrote:
> (Sorry, I have to type manually - hence as few keystrokes as possible)
The format is really confusing, although I know what you are trying to do.
> Now, here is my question:
> Although tests failed which are NOT mentioned in the book, can I safely
> assume that these
Andrew Benton wrote:
> Hello all
> I've recently started using gcc-4.5.0 and one of the features of it is that
> it installs
> a python script called libstdc++.so.6.0.14-gdb.py into /usr/lib. This causes
> ldconfig
> to complain every time it is run, so pretty much every one of my build logs
> h
stosss wrote:
> Why are you building 6.3 when 6.6 is out and 6.7 will be coming out
> some time in the near future.
Not that near. We're trying 6 month schedule -- March and September.
6.6 should be good though.
-- Bruce
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: h
Franz L. Kuhlmann wrote:
> Here are details extracted from "*glibc-check-log*":
That's good info. What is the output of uname -a on your host in the
the virtual system? It sounds like it may be an old kernel or one that
is not compiled with needed options.
The cannot open shared object file '
duck wilson wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> I am working thru LFS 6.6. In Section 6.22 (Coreutils-8.4) where running the
> coreutils tests as user nobody the book gives the following command:
>
> su-tools nobody -s /bin/bash -c "make RUN_EXPENSIVE_TESTS=yes check"
>
> When I run this command, I cut-and-
JimD. wrote:
> configure: error: unsupported system, cannot find sizeof (omp_lock_t)
> make[1]: *** [configure-target-libgomp] Error 1
> make[1]: Leaving directory `/mnt/lfs/sources/gcc-build'
> make: *** [all] Error 2
Are you using lfs-svn-20100420 or later?
-- Bruce
--
http://linuxfromscra
Dmytro Boyko wrote:
> Hi!
> When I attempted execute "make" in section 5.9. Binutils-2.19.1 - Pass 2
> I got an error:
> checking for off_t... yes
> checking size of off_t... configure: error: in
> `/mnt/LFS/source/binutils-build/bfd':
> configure: error: cannot compute sizeof (off_t), 77
> See `c
jumbophut wrote:
> I'm not sure if it will fix the module issues, but the system probably
> expects to find the System.map file at /boot/System.map-2.6.30.2-xxx,
> where xxx is the value returned by uname -r on your system (it's 686
> on mine).
System.map is only used by klogd. Kernel developers
gaurav k wrote:
> Hey Guys,
>
> This is my first mail to the list- I'm a relative newbie- though not a
> complete Linux noob who is clueless about what is happening.
>
>
> I am using Ubuntu 10.04- Lucid Lynx and I'm following LFS version 6.6.
>
>
> My Host System Requirements output is as f
Zhiyu Ren wrote:
> LinkedIn
User blocked. I sent a message to LinkedIn to try to get them to not
send invitations to the linuxfromscratch.org domain.
-- Bruce
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the a
xinglp wrote:
> I tested it on both LFS-SVN and LFS-6.5. Do I have to turn on
> something in the kernel.
You're a little short of info here. Does klogd run OK? Do you get any
errors when you build? I don't know of anything different in the
kernel, but which kernel are you using? Do you get a
xinglp wrote:
> strace result is like below
>
> [pid 440] read(2, "\n-8\n", 2048) = 11
> [pid 440] close(2)= 0
> [pid 440] munmap(0xb7723000, 4096)= 0
> [pid 440] write(1, "<6>May 5 21:58:10 kernel: klogd 1.5.0, log source =
> /proc/kmsg started.\0", 73) = 73
> [pi
Philippe Delavalade wrote:
> Hi.
>
> The wget-list in svn-20100503 tells to download zlib-1.2.4 but this is
> nomore the current version and so, wget -i wget-list does not work
> here.
>
> Is it possible to download version 1.2.5 or is it really safer to deal with
> 1.2.4 ?
1.2.5 should be OK.
Mike McCarty wrote:
> Rather than try to figure out what packages actually require
> bash features, and contact their maintainers, and then hope to
> get fixes in place, they have chosen simply to say "make
> /bin/sh point to a copy of bash".
Actually, the last time I checked, one of the main pac
gaurav k wrote:
> Hey Guys...
>
> I just thought I'd let you all know how it turned out.
>
> Chris, you were absolutely right. There was a package missing. I had
> followed "host system requirements", but it seems that autoconf is
> needed too. Ubuntu Lucid does not have it installed by default.
Andrew Benton wrote:
> On 07/05/10 11:47, xinglp wrote:
>> md5sum -c .\list.md5
>>
>> lfs-bootscripts-20100124.tar.bz2: FAILED
>> udev-config-20100128.tar.bz2: FAILED
>> md5sum: WARNING: 2 of 76 computed checksums did NOT match
>>
> I wouldn't worry about those. The bootscripts and udev config chan
Jannis Kafkoulas wrote:
> I thought first my subscription wasn't valid any more and
> therefore I tried to subscribe again.
>
> Does someone know what that all means?
Not really. Your account looks good and you obviously got this through.
I got a similar message last night and attributed to
Ticket #2661
On my x86_64 machine ./config.guess script of GMP 5.01 (and 5.00 as
well) returns 'athlon-unknown-linux-gnu' which is incorrectly considered
by ./configure script as 32-bit platform, so it expects sizeof(long) to
be 4, when it is actually 8:
checking compiler cc -O2 -pedantic -fo
Yan Mo wrote:
> Hi, got past the previous issue by using a newer machine.
>
> Now have got upto section 8.4.2 in the LFS-BOOK-6.6
>
> After entering:
>
> grub-install --grub-setup=/bin/true /dev/sda
>
> It gives the messages:
>
> grub-probe: error: cannot find a device for /boot/grub.
>
>
Mag Gam wrote:
> I am trying to compile gzip using icc. I tried following these
> instructions,
> http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/hints/downloads/files/intel-c-compiler.txt
>
>
> But I keep getting,
>
> isnan.c(132): error: floating-point operation result is out of range
> static memory_dou
Mac Zero wrote:
> I've just completed an jhalfs (latest development version) script of
> LFS-SVN20100506. No errors were reported so I moved on to setting the root
> password, editing /etc files, etc.
>
> I entered to the chroot using the command in section 6.4, but when I try and
> set the root
William Immendorf wrote:
> On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 5:36 PM, Kyle Brennan wrote:
>> /usr/bin/install -c -m 644
>> /mnt/lfs/tools/glibc-build/../include/linux/limits.h
>> /tools/include/linux/limits.h
>> /usr/bin/install: `/mnt/lfs/tools/glibc-build/../include/linux/limits.h' and
>> `/tools/include/
Kyle Brennan wrote:
> Hi,
> I am new here and I am attempting my first LFS build. I get to Glibc in
> chapter 5.7 and everything goes smoothly until i get to the "make"
> command. I run the command and it works for about fifteen minutes and
> it Gives me the following error:
>
> make: *** [al
Kyle Brennan wrote:
> /mnt/lfs/tools/bin/../lib/gcc/i686-lfs-linux-gnu/4.4.3/../../../../i686-lfs-linux-gnu/bin/ld:
>
> cannot find -lgcc_eh
It looks like a problem with the gcc build. You should have:
/mnt/lfs/tools/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.4.3/libgcc_eh.a or
/mnt/lfs/tools/gcc/i686-pc
Kyle Brennan wrote:
> On 05/23/2010 06:07 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>> Kyle Brennan wrote:
>>
>>
>>> /mnt/lfs/tools/bin/../lib/gcc/i686-lfs-linux-gnu/4.4.3/../../../../i686-lfs-linux-gnu/bin/ld:
>>>
>>
>>> cannot find -lgcc_eh
>&g
Kyle Brennan wrote:
>>>
>> These types of errors usually means you don't have CFLAGS set correctly,
>> which points to some problem with configparms. Do "cat configparms".
>>
> It worked, and just a quick question, when you go for pass 2, 3, etc...
> do you start over with a clean build
Kyle Brennan wrote:
> Hi again,
> Big problem here, It appears that Gawk was improperly configured and now
> when I try to configure my Glibc build, it runs into an error where it
> cannot find the awk command.
Read section vii. Host System Requirements.
-- Bruce
--
http://linuxfromscratch.
Mike McCarty wrote:
> Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>> Kyle Brennan wrote:
>>> Hi again,
>>> Big problem here, It appears that Gawk was improperly configured and now
>>> when I try to configure my Glibc build, it runs into an error where it
>>> cannot find the
mhenriqu...@terra.cl wrote:
> Hi Ken:
>
> Thanks for your reply and yeap, it seems that it was a issue related to
> a non deleted build or source folder, I rebuild the toolchain from
> chapter 5 and then again the toolchain of chapter 6 taking care of
> delete those folders and now gcc final co
Paul Rogers wrote:
> Have built LFS-4.1 & -6.1, trying to build -6.6 on -6.1. Stage 1 seemed
> to go well. Building glibc early in Stage2 failed. I did a search, saw
> others had a similar problem, but didn't see a relevant solution. The
> /scripts in my $PATH is where I put my cut&pasted "bui
Neal Murphy wrote:
> On Wednesday 26 May 2010 08:33:20 linux fan wrote:
>> On 5/26/10, Simon Geard wrote:
>>> I can't really see how things can be improved (short of blinking red
>>> text on *every* page), but it does seem like half the problems we deal
>>> with are from people not following it. A
Paul Rogers wrote:
>> We've seen this before and there was really no good answer.
>>
>> I did some googling and I think this may be a kernel issue. In the
>> kernel .config I am using, there is
>>
>> # CONFIG_CC_STACKPROTECTOR is not set
>>
>> I'm using an X86_64 and not a i686, so that may make a
Paul Rogers wrote:
> OK, I did that. It paused about one
> second, then returned a command prompt. No console messages at all.
> Ummm, waita minute! (I don't compile anything unless I'm installing
> a package--I finished being a programmer over 25 years ago.) I guess
> that means it worked, eh?
Paul Rogers wrote:
>> The __stack_chk_guard which is only seen by grep in gcc, must have
>> gotten built in at some earlier step or possibly bled in from the
>
> How far back do you suppose? Stage 2 pass 1 or Stage 1 pass 2? I can
> quite confidently rip either out and replace it with my script
Paul Rogers wrote:
> So it seems the HSR needs GCC>4.2, kernel>2.6.19?
I'm not sure about that, but it's possible. I have an older LFS system
that I use for day-to-day work. It is an i686 originally built in Nov
2005 using gcc-4.0.2, Linux 2.6.12, glibc-2.3.6. (SVN-20051118,
approximately LF
Paul Rogers wrote:
>> My advice would be to use jhalfs for some arbitrary version of the
>> book that you choose and just let it run. We know that LFS-6.3 works
>> because it has been used a lot from the last LiveCD. That would be a
>> good candidate for an intermediate release.
>
> No, if I de
x2...@lycos.com wrote:
That was a very entertaining post. Thanks.
On a more serious note, we do try to address problems that come up. The
issue is that we have seen lots of posts where the final resolution is
"oops, it was my error, not the book's". (Which you humorously noted.)
The reas
David Expósito wrote:
> Hello
>
> I wonder if anyone has compiled lfs-scratch 6.3, the X-window environment
> Section 23 of BLFS. X Window System Environment
There is a separate list for blfs-support. Please use that for non-lfs
issues.
-- Bruce
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/list
Paul Rogers wrote:
> As seems
> indicated by the current situation, someone should adopt a QC role, and
> have one system that trails, i.e. has exactly the package versions
> specified in the HSR, and verifies that each version of LFS does in fact
> install flawlessly with those prerequisites.
>> The Host System requirements may indeed be too low for LFS 6.6
Updated to the packages in LFS-6.3, known to work for LFS-6.6 Added
erratum to website.
-- Bruce
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See t
Baho Utot wrote:
> On 06/01/10 15:19, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>> Paul Rogers wrote:
>>
>>> As seems
>>> indicated by the current situation, someone should adopt a QC role, and
>>> have one system that trails, i.e. has exactly the package versions
>>> s
Baho Utot wrote:
> The system I am using to compile this stuff is an AMD Phenom(tm) II X4
> 810 Processor that has 8G DDR3 memory. I use that system so I can make
> mistakes really fast ;) ie things can go sour quickly and at a high rate
> of speed. You usually don't get a chance to see them l
Mike McCarty wrote:
>> time -- 2.5 - 3 days (being generous here)
>
> I think you are being optimistic, for the first build, anyway.
> I'd put in 5 days for getting the first build up and running.
This all depends on experience. Actually I think there is a sweet spot.
Too much experience and
mhenriqu...@terra.cl wrote:
> One minor issue that is bugging me, is that there is something wrong
> about the sda1 and ext3 filesystem about the dates, since each time that
> I turn on the virtual machine the system stop at booting telling me that
> the check date on the filesystem is in the f
mhenriqu...@terra.cl wrote:
> On 06/02/2010 11:32 AM, Ken Moffat wrote:
>> On 2 June 2010 16:05, mhenriqu...@terra.cl wrote:
>>> So, I wonder if there is some way to check what dates the ext3
>>> filesystem is taking into account to see what is wrong there or more
>>> simple, a way to turn off th
Mike McCarty wrote:
> linux fan wrote:
>> On 6/2/10, Danny Engelbarts wrote:
>>
>>> ... a 6.3 system is required than the book should state 6.3 until proven
>>> otherwise.
>> That is just exactly what the DEV book now requires.
>>
>> Unfortunately, now we don't get to find out exactly why the ori
Neal Murphy wrote:
> Some time back (LFS 6.4), I discovered that perl's configure program can
> poison the build; it is designed to be extremely helpful by ferreting out
> features of the host system to support. Specifically in my case, because it
> found libgdbm on the host system, it configure
linux fan wrote:
> On 6/2/10, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>
>> The version of glibc within chroot certainly should support ssp but the
>> two reports we have didn't seem to find it automatically. Others cannot
>> duplicate the problem. If we had consistent errors on mo
littlebat wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am learning: 4.4. Setting Up the Environment:
> http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/6.6/chapter04/settingenvironment.html
> . My host system is Ubuntu 10.04.
>
> I found it can't properly to set $PS1 for user "lfs" with the command
> below provided by LFS6.6 book
Neal Murphy wrote:
> On Thursday 03 June 2010 14:45:04 Chris Staub wrote:
>> On 06/03/2010 11:33 AM, Neal Murphy wrote:
>>> On Thursday 03 June 2010 04:08:33 Simon Geard wrote:
> IIRC, the problem became apparent when the toolchain perl tried to
> run in the chroot jail during the final build (Ch.
Paul Rogers wrote:
>> shouldn't be a cross compiler. IE, it shouldn't have been configured
>> with --target=$LFS_TGT. I wonder if the people reporting these errors
>> mistakenly used the option --target=$LFS_TGT when they compiled gcc the
>> second time in chapter 5?
>
> Yes, I can definitely c
Paul Rogers wrote:
>>> Then this evening I made a copy of the script without that line and
>>> recompiled glibc with the Stage2 compiler as the next step. No
>>> problem this time. So I think I have a fairly straightforward
>>> workaround. I don't imagine there was any need for the nscd code to
>
littlebat wrote:
>> Try adding "--noprofile --rc ~lfs/.bashrc" to the bash command. Or
>> just
>
> Ubuntu bash has a bug, even if I specified --rcfile, it still read
> /etc/bash.bashrc.
That's because /etc/profile does it explicitly:
PS1='\...@\h:\w\$ '
if [ -f /etc/bash.bashrc ]; then
. /e
Tim Burress wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I've just finished upgrading from LFS 6.5 to 6.6 and there were a few
> small inconsistencies I noticed along the way:
>
> (1) When building make, the book calls for a patch called
> make-3.81-upsream_fixes-1.patch, but this is not available in the FTP
> archive
linux fan wrote:
> # Hack to solve glibc __stack_chk_guard cross compile ( < 2.4 :)
> # this schpeel in LFS-6.6 ch5 gcc-pass1 and ch5 gcc-pass2 after unpack:
> glibc=$(ls /lib/libc-*.so)
> read j1 v[0] v[1] v[2] j2 <<< ${glibc//[-.]/ }
> if (( v[0] < 2 )) || (( v[1] < 4 )) && [ -f gcc/configure ];
Paul Rogers wrote:
> I don't recall the book saying anything about it, possibly runlevel
> 3 is so typical it has never come up, but as I mentioned a week ago
> or so, I think there would be an advantage to building LFS within
> runlevel 2--where there's no network running, no chance of some
> exte
Neal Murphy wrote:
>>> That's not so easy. We create the book with Docbook xml. I don't know
>>> of a way to to do that. We do have both a change log and a "What's new"
>>> section. We are trying to do a new release every 6 months. If you look
>>> at "What's new", almost every package changes
piper.guy1 wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Started reading and doing what the book says (6.6). Didn't take too
> long before I got myself into trouble. :-(
>
> In " Host system Requirements", the instructions explicitly wants
> '/bin/sh' to be pointing to bash. Mine was pointing to dash. So I
> endeavoured to c
linux fan wrote:
> I haven't read where piper.guy confirmed that bash is installed or
> that if bash is not installed, that changing the link to point to bash
> won't help.
I don't know of a distro that doesn't install bash by default unless you
are using tomsrtbt.
-- Bruce
--
http://linuxf
Mike McCarty wrote:
> # cd LFS/6.3
> # rm -rf build
>
> and deleted /dev from my host system! No discs, no printers, no
> terminals, etc. I rebooted with a Knoppix disc, let it populate
> /dev, and then mounted my hard drive, and copied (yes copied
> using cp) /dev onto my hard drive.
I don't t
Mike McCarty wrote:
> Yeah, deleting the link without changing your /etc/passwd entry
> to point to a valid shell would do that.
Changing the /etc/password file won't do much. The bootscripts need
/bin/sh.
-- Bruce
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www
Neal Murphy wrote:
> I started playing with UNIX in 1986, and Linux in the
> mid-nineties. And just a couple weeks ago, I overwrote a disk that contained
> half of a couple striped MD filesystems. Lost nearly 10 years of pics and
> history.
No backups? How is this different (in effect) from a
Aleksandar Kuktin wrote:
>> On Fri, 11 Jun 2010 13:16:24 -0500
>> Mike McCarty wrote:
>>
>> Use a red colored prompt when running with root authorization.
>>
>> Hope you keep learning for a long time.
>>
>> Mike
>
> See, this is a good point. :)
>
> I should fix this on my system.
You might try
Simon Geard wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-06-11 at 13:16 -0500, Mike McCarty wrote:
>> Use a red colored prompt when running with root authorization.
>
> Oh yes, I can't agree with that one enough. Not that you want to
> accidentally run "rm -rf ~" as *any* user,
I run 'rm *~' often enough. I am alway
On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 5:38 PM, James E. Lang wrote:
> I am part of a Linux Users Group that has taken on LFS as a group learning
> aid.
>
>
>
> The errata for Host System Requirements for v6.6 contains this line:
>
> Linux Kernel-2.6.22.5 (having been compiled with GCC-4.12 or greater)
>
> Is t
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 4:14 AM, Mohsen Pahlevanzadeh
wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> I'm in top of Chapter 5. Constructing a Temporary System.At this chapter
> some package is introduced that we must compile them.My question is:
> Do they have Chapter priority in compile same listed in chapter?For
> examp
Michael Vahl wrote:
> Hey y'all,
>
> i've recently passed all prior steps of chapter 8.4.2 (LFS 6.6). But now,
> without any error messages, I'm not able to execute "grub-install
> --grub-setup=/bin/true /dev/sda". grub-install can be found and sda is the
> system's hdd but the system doesn't conf
Michael Vahl wrote:
>>> Michael Vahl wrote:
>>> Hey y'all,
>>>
>>> i've recently passed all prior steps of chapter 8.4.2 (LFS 6.6). But now,
>>> without any error messages, I'm not able to execute "grub-install
>>> --grub-setup=/bin/true /dev/sda". grub-install can be found and sda is
> the
>>> sys
Face wrote:
> is this normal
>
>
> ../gcc-4.5.0/configure \
> --target=$LFS_TGT --prefix=/tools \
> --disable-nls --disable-shared --disable-multilib \
> --disable-decimal-float --disable-threads \
> --disable-libmudflap --disable-libssp \
>
Michael Vahl wrote:
> After a step-by-step execution of grub-install, I determined that the script
> grub-mkconfig_lib in /usr/lib/grub/ (line 35 of grub-install) doesn't have
> the appropriate filemode (changed to 755).
What were the permissions? They should be 644. A sourced file dies not
n
JAY PRAKASH SINGH wrote:
> Hello , sir I am student pursuing B.tech 5th sem , I want to design design
> and and implement my own operating system plz tell me how and where I should
> start.
Take a University level course on operating systems.
Alternatively, read a book. For example:
http://www.
Andrew Benton wrote:
> It would take hundreds of gifted people more than a decade to achieve
> such a thing.
Or Linus about a year.
-- Bruce
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information pa
al...@verizon.net wrote:
> Jun 20, 2010 06:21:59 AM, Andrew Benton wrote
> Jun 20, 2010 08:51:09 AM, Aleksandar Kuktin wrote
>> Can we see your 'config' file?
>
> Sure. I'll try to attach it. If you do not get it
> point me to some other way to pass it along.
> ...
> Unfortunately (could my nouv
Paul Rogers wrote:
It would take hundreds of gifted people more than a decade to
achieve such a thing.
>>> Or Linus about a year.
>> I'm not sure the OP could absorb that much info that quickly.
>
> Not to mention that Linus' first kernel wasn't what we know today.
> It ran a 386, and wa
JimD. wrote:
> As for Minux, another endeavor that failed to meet expectations.
It depends on what you think the expectations were. My book on Minix is
dated 1988 and included a 5.25 floppy with the entire source code, about
13000 lines. Tannenbaum said he wrote it for instructional reasons,
JimD. wrote:
> > As for Minux, another endeavor that failed to meet expectations.
>
>> It depends on what you think the expectations were. My book on Minix is
>> dated 1988 and included a 5.25 floppy with the entire source code, about
>> 13000 lines. Tannenbaum said he wrote it for instructiona
JimD. wrote:
>> Ideal starting place for what? Learning how an OS works?
> The problem with Minux circa 1988 is that the code was poorly written and
> buggy.
> The concepts used are non-starters 20 years later.
> Are you maintaining that in the past 20+ years nothing better is out there?
No. Of
Eric Miller wrote:
> hey all...haven't been here since 2002 lolz.
>
> I'm hoping to build a stripped down LFS to use on a livecd that will do one
> thing only: present the user with a simple scripted text menu, and then
> (based on the menu input) .dd an image to a usb thumb drive.
>
> That's it
Franz L. Kuhlmann wrote:
> root:/sources/linux-2.6.32.8# ls
> COPYING Makefile block include mm sound
> CREDITS README crypto init net tools
> Documentation REPORTING-BUGS drivers ipc samples usr
> Kbuild arch firmware kernel scripts virt
> MAINTAINERS bash fs lib security
>
> root:/sources/linux-
Neal Murphy wrote:
> On Thursday 24 June 2010 16:25:45 Franz L. Kuhlmann wrote:
>> ...
>> ### I think the /bin/sh symlink is ok, (didn't try it in new shell yet -
>> how do I do that BTW???)
>
> Both of the following commands display the symlink's target:
> ln -s /bin/sh
> readlink /bin/sh
O
littlebat wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I try to measure SBU when installing every package with command
> "time {}" and consider post my measure into
> " http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~sbu ".
>
>
> 1, If only those packages marked "SBU testsuite included" should include
> the time spent on test into SBU
Saxon Landers wrote:
> hi, i have just finished chapter 5 of the LFS6.6 book, and have
> completed ch 6 to 6.3. I am up to chrooting into the environment.
>
> here's where the problem arises. the chroot command passes (is that the
> right word?) the /tools/bin/env command with argument -i, howev
littlebat wrote:
> I am learning LFS BOOK 6.6.
>
> Do you mean every SBU measure include test time described in the head
> of the page of the package in Chapter 6 which has a testsuite and don't
> include test time in Chapter 5?
Yes. The SBU times are really only a guide. They are quite variab
Face wrote:
> cannot extract linux-2.6.34.tar.bz2
>
>
> root:/sources# tar xjvf linux-2.6.34.tar.bz2
> tar (child): linux-2.6.34.tar.bz2: Cannot open: No such file or directory
> tar (child): Error is not recoverable: exiting now
> tar: Child returned status 2
> tar: Error is not recoverable: exi
littlebat wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Jun 2010 21:07:06 -0500
> Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>
>
>> It's just not important enough to fix. If someone creates a patch,
>> I'll apply it.
>
> Here is a patch, you can apply it if it is helpful.
That's a script, not a
$reeHari wrote:
> hi ,
> i've just started my lfs adventure , but unfortunately got a problem right
> from the start . i'm following lfs book version 6.3 . I'm on chapter 5.3.1 -
> installation of binutils . I first installed binutils and it was okey .
> after that when i try recompile ld with LIB_
littlebat wrote:
> On Thu, 01 Jul 2010 10:41:38 -0500
> Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>> That's a script, not a patch.
>>
>> For an example of a patch, see
>> http://wiki.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/attachment/ticket/2371/program-list-update.patch
>
> Here is a
Neal Murphy wrote:
> On Friday 02 July 2010 15:11:31 Face wrote:
>> well, thank you all, i will start over and see what will happen.
>> I am using a shell script to do the book if someone could take a look
>> at it, that would be nice .
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
F
Face wrote:
> well, thank you all, i will start over and see what will happen.
> I am using a shell script to do the book if someone could take a look
> at it, that would be nice .
Ignore the previous post I accidentally sent.
For any complex task like LFS, you should be able to successfully do t
Face wrote:
> it has been over 2 months since my first try i think. going through
> the book manually over and over, I had many mistypes which force me to
> start over. Therefore, I put them in a script so i can avoid mistypes.
> Yes i do agree the script is way too long , however, alot of the lin
Ken Moffat wrote:
> On 3 July 2010 14:28, linux fan wrote:
>> If the 50GB host Operating System(Debian 5.0.5) is needed to run (yes,
>> I think), then you need to use a separate partition to contain the
>> destination LFS system. I think 12 GB is a good size. 5GB is a little
>> too small if many t
James Butler wrote:
> Can the dedicated partition that I use for my lfs be a logical volume created
> from a dedicated partition?
> This is what my setup looks like:
>
> /dev/sda1/boot
>
> Volume Groups
> >vg_deltaflyer
> >Physical View
> >/dev/sda2
> >Log
Saxon Landers wrote:
> ""
> I'm making a *swag* on this. I'll bet your 'sdb' is called 'sdb1' or has
> a uuid given to it by the Ubuntu kernel.
I'm not very sure I can help, but the uuid is created by mkfs, when the
partition is formatted under whatever distro you are using.
> List of all parti
1 - 100 of 1593 matches
Mail list logo
