On Wed, 2010-03-31 at 12:05 -0400, Kaleb Hosie wrote:
> I'm having some issues with installing glibc while following the instructions
> on chapter 5.7.
>
> >From what I understand from the instructions, I made the file:
> /mnt/lfs/sources/glibc-build/configparms
>
> In the configparms file, I sh
On Sat, 2010-04-03 at 00:36 -0400, stosss wrote:
> Any one have any suggestions?
>
> The LFS x86_64 6.3 r2160 LiveCD boots but won't read the SATA discs.
>
> I tried the Fedora LiveCD and it won't even boot. Neither will the
> Gentoo x86_64 or Debian x86_64 install CDs
I've generally found the U
On Tue, 2010-04-13 at 08:52 -0400, duck wilson wrote:
> According to the book my next step is to do "make mrproper" which has
> gotten me stumped. Do I do this make in $LFS/sources or do I need to
> extract the Linux kernel files and cd to the kernel directory and
> execute the commands in Section
On Tue, 2010-04-13 at 13:38 -0500, Jordan Peters wrote:
> afte binutils is done with the make install i try testing it like it
> says in the book. i am told it cannot run compiled c program. is
> x86_64 32 bit?
You need to give us a bit more detail for us to help. The *exact* error
copied into an
On Tue, 2010-04-13 at 09:35 -0400, linux fan wrote:
> I stopped the haldeamon and started up kde 4.4.2 (pretty new stuff).
> Then I started dragonplayer and it immediately told me that my audio
> playback device does not work.
>
> I guess "deprecated" is not synonymous with "you don't need it".
N
On Thu, 2010-04-15 at 17:26 -0700, Jordan Peters wrote:
> I'm going through the LFS 6.6 book with ubuntu 9.10 as the host and
> I'm wondering if there are any tutorials anywhere to help if I want to
> try creating a custom filesystem setup. Like having /apps instead
> of /bin, /users instead of
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 strerror... configure: error: L
On Fri, 2010-04-16 at 23:45 -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> 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
On Wed, 2010-04-21 at 11:40 -0700, James Richard Tyrer wrote:
> On 04/21/10 03:55, Simon Geard wrote:
> > On Tue, 2010-04-20 at 14:57 -0700, James Richard Tyrer wrote:
> >> As I mentioned elsewhere, I had an issue building it, but I now have
> >> version 0.8 of
On Tue, 2010-05-04 at 07:54 +0530, gaurav k wrote:
> I have not deviated from the book at all, the only possible difference
> might be any differences in the host system requirement. For
> example, /bin/sh is not a symlink to bash, but I've only used bash
> throughout.
That *is* a deviation - yo
On Wed, 2010-05-05 at 12:05 -0400, Chris Staub wrote:
> Then those that do should be considered buggy and must be fixed.
> Personally I think that requiring /bin/sh -> bash is pointless, and that
> if there are any packages that have /bin/sh while using Bash features
> those packages should be c
On Wed, 2010-05-05 at 22:12 +0100, Ken Moffat wrote:
> In the real world, I believe dash has improved a
> lot once they started using it as /bin/sh, but it's
> still sufficently different to cause problems, e.g.
> in the kernel's build scripts.
That, and most package maintainers have been happy t
On Fri, 2010-05-07 at 21:37 +1200, jumbophut wrote:
> On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 6:08 PM, xinglp wrote:
> > like this
> > a6de1cc6434cd64038b0a0ae4e252b33 autoconf-2.65.tar.bz2
> > c2972c4d9b3e29c03d5f2af86249876f automake-1.11.1.tar.bz2
> > 9800d8724815fd84994d9be65ab5e7b8 bash-4.1.tar.gz
> > just
On Mon, 2010-05-10 at 18:11 +0200, Dr.-Ing. Edgar Alwers wrote:
> This is a sentence I clearly understand. Simon, I apologize for beeing
> a little sarcastic instead of trying to contribute with a better text.
> The problem is, I have had bad experiences with some developers. As
> "Linux fan" point
On Wed, 2010-05-19 at 00:12 -0500, Mike McCarty wrote:
> Leho Pärnapuu wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I have one old Laptop: Compaq LTE 5300.
>
> Something to watch for with Compaq computers: They
> don't like to boot other than the pre installed
> OS. Some of them will complain that you have a corrup
On Wed, 2010-05-26 at 01:05 -0700, Johnneylee Rollins wrote:
> You might want to master killfiles.
> Just add the user to them. Also, gmail as a rather easy to manage
> ignore feature.
Blocking the user isn't the answer, since the emails appear to come from
the LinkedIn member's email address, no
On Tue, 2010-05-25 at 15:48 -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> > just to bother, the book mention something about that somewhere?, do I
> > miss something...
>
> 5.2 Important Note #1.
>
>-- Bruce
Out of curiosity, do you have any idea what proportion of questions on
this list are due to people no
On Mon, 2010-05-31 at 09:35 -0700, Paul Rogers wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-05-31 at 00:36 +0100, Ken Moffat wrote:
> > What you are overlooking is that "doing it my way" comes with "when
> > it breaks, I get to keep all the pieces".
>
> What a curious thing to write in a SUPPORT forum of a LINUX distr
On Mon, 2010-05-31 at 19:11 -0400, x2...@lycos.com wrote:
> So Paul, what i really need to say is "that if it breaks, you get to
> keep the pieces" but maybe, more important, "if it doesn't break,
> you still get to keep the pieces".
Well yes, that's true. But then, LFS is a natural path for
On Thu, 2010-06-03 at 02:39 -0400, Neal Murphy wrote:
> On Thursday 03 June 2010 00:30:58 Chris Staub wrote:
> > I just built Perl in Chapter 5, and I do have gdbm installed (this is on
> > a couple-week-old LFS svn host system). I get " NOT found."
> > during Configure, and it doesn't look like an
On Wed, 2010-06-02 at 17:05 -0700, Paul Rogers wrote:
> And if that leads some of us to scoff at the idea of dragons, it has, in
> fact, done the job.
Oh, I don't scoff at the idea of dragons - I just don't recommend
stopping and asking them for directions. :)
Simon.
signature.asc
Description:
On Sun, 2010-06-06 at 17:56 +0800, littlebat wrote:
> Base on my knowledge, I found the env command can't set like "set +h"
> or "umask 022" those are set in the file .bashrc.
I don't know of any way of setting umask that way, but any option you
can pass to "set" can also be passed to "bash" itsel
On Mon, 2010-06-07 at 17:45 -0500, Bruce Dubbs 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",
On Tue, 2010-06-08 at 19:54 -0400, Neal Murphy wrote:
> So, in the case that spawned this thread, the used could have continued to
> use
> his shell, albeit vey carefully and judiciously, until he exitted that shell.
> Even if he performed an 'rm -rf /', his shell would continue to run and he
>
On Wed, 2010-06-09 at 12:00 -0400, linux fan wrote:
> Speaking of backups and rescue disks, I am using an "rsync snapshots"
> style of backup. It does not compress, yet it can save multiple
> "copies" of a system at different points in time using remarkable
> little disk space. Any "copy" can be rs
On Thu, 2010-06-10 at 03:55 -0500, Mike McCarty wrote:
> Simon Geard wrote:
> > I quite like an idea Fedora are working on - if installed to a btrfs
> > partition, use it's snapshot support to provide an easy rollback option
> > when installing updates.
> >
&
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, but the red root prompt is a
useful reminder that you're playing with
On Sat, 2010-06-12 at 02:55 +, Face Man wrote:
> checking whether ld is GNU ld... no
> checking for
> /tools/lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.5.0/../../../../x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/bin/as...
>
> /tools/lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.5.0/../../../../x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/bin/as
> c
On Mon, 2010-06-14 at 13:43 +0300, Face wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 1:25 PM, littlebat wrote:
> > It seems you have missed something, I remember we should always use
> > non-root user (lfs) to compile LFS in chapter 5 at least.
> >
> when i add lfs user i get permissions problems
This proba
On Tue, 2010-06-15 at 12:23 -0400, Neal Murphy wrote:
> To be absolutely clear, and to directly answer the question, yes, it is a
> problem because Expect will fail to compile if the TCL programs and libraries
> are not found.
Or worse, will find the chapter 5 versions of those programs & librar
On Tue, 2010-06-15 at 21:45 +0430, Mohsen Pahlevanzadeh wrote:
> In appendex (Dependency section), we have 2 part for each package:
The appendix is for information only. When it comes to installing
packages, follow the *exact* instructions in the main book, in the
*exact* order they're in.
Simon.
On Fri, 2010-06-18 at 21:59 +0100, Andrew Benton wrote:
> No, you're not helping. His video card need some firmware to work with
> the nouveau driver. He needs to either put the firmware in /lib/firmware
> or compile it into the kernel. If he read the syslog from the failed
> boot he would see t
On Fri, 2010-06-18 at 17:35 +0100, Andrew Benton wrote:
> On 18/06/10 02:29, al...@verizon.net wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > i686-pc-linux-gnu, 2.6.34, udev-156, (B)LFS
> > NVidia GeForce 8300GS
> >
>
> I think the 8000 series needs extra firmware. My wife's computer has a
> 8400GS which needs nv86.c
On Sun, 2010-06-20 at 18:04 -0500, al...@verizon.net wrote:
> I bzip2'ed the file, so let's see if 11702 bytes can now
> sneak below the 50 KB limit :).
>
> BTW, 'config' is for a system of this nature:
>
> ASUS P5E-VM HDMI, intel Core2Duo E8400 @ 3.00GHz.
> G.SKILL 4GB (2 x 2GB) DDR2 1000 (PC2 8
On Sun, 2010-06-20 at 22:32 +0100, Andrew Benton wrote:
> Err, I think you'll find that learning how to "design and implement my
> own operating system" is more than a bit of homework. It would take
> hundreds of gifted people more than a decade to achieve such a thing.
Not necessarily - I gathe
On Mon, 2010-06-21 at 11:21 -0500, al...@verizon.net wrote:
> I'm attaching the compressed copy of the new 'config'.
I notice CONFIG_DRM_I915 is set, as a module. Shouldn't matter in theory
since you presumably don't have Intel graphics hardware as well as
NVidia, but probably worth disabling it a
On Tue, 2010-06-22 at 10:49 -0500, al...@verizon.net wrote:
> How come the original NVIDIA driver, after all these ugly
> and hostile parameter settings I threw at it, it was left still
> standing at the end of the day?
The one thing the nVidia driver is supposedly intolerant of is
framebuffer dri
On Mon, 2010-06-28 at 13:28 -0500, al...@verizon.net wrote:
> Whether I have "fbcon" in the kernel or as a module (with its
> convenient font, 80x25 full wide-screen) I cannot (or I
> don't know how to) change the 240x67 resolution back to
> what I have always used and preferred, 80x25 full wide-sc
On Tue, 2010-06-29 at 10:25 -0500, al...@verizon.net wrote:
> With "nouveau", my boot-up goes through these basic steps:
>
> 1. The original/"regular" console sequence (80x25)
At this point, the display is under BIOS control, running in the default
text mode - the same as for GRUB, and (depending
On Wed, 2010-06-30 at 13:25 -0500, Mike McCarty wrote:
> Simon Geard wrote:
> > On Tue, 2010-06-29 at 10:25 -0500, al...@verizon.net wrote:
>
> You were ok up to here...
A combination of trying to simplify, and trying to remember stuff I last
played with in college, back w
On Wed, 2010-06-30 at 20:46 -0500, al...@verizon.net wrote:
> Simon, Trent, Mike:
>
> Thank you very much for the rich, detailed, interesting
> theories and explanations about video drivers, booting,
> X, fonts, pixels, my boot-up component steps, etc.
> All this knowledge and experience is obviou
On Thu, 2010-07-01 at 17:59 -0500, Mike McCarty wrote:
> Apparently, it's the stated non-goal to support switching back
> by the authors (or at least owners) of the driver.
> So, unless he's willing to get the source for the driver, and
> rewrite portions of it himself, there's not going to be a wa
On Thu, 2010-07-01 at 22:39 -0400, Neal Murphy wrote:
> Sometimes, deleting everything and starting anew is all you *can* do.
More than that, it's often easier too. Less effort to start again paying
closer attention to the instructions, than to spend time trying to work
out how to fix the results
On Sat, 2010-07-03 at 02:19 +0300, Face wrote:
> Neal,
>
> thanks alot for going through the script I appreciated.
>
> well, I do have error detection i disable it on the script i attached.
> its like this
That's not error detection - that's just logging stderr. The biggest
problem with scripte
On Sat, 2010-07-03 at 03:40 +0300, 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.
To start with, copy-paste from the
On Fri, 2010-07-02 at 11:14 -0500, Mike McCarty wrote:
> OTOH, my version (with X and GNOME) seems to switch to 80x25 very
> easily when I press CTRL-ALT-F1 through CTRL-ALT-F6, so the kernel
> must support _something_ along those lines.
You're using the Nouveau driver? The X-only drivers like NVI
On Wed, 2010-07-14 at 13:37 -0500, Mike McCarty wrote:
> Simon Geard wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > That's experience talking, I might add. My LFS builds are almost always
> > scripted, and more than once, I've investigated a compile problem that's
>
>
On Thu, 2010-07-08 at 22:32 +0530, $reeHari wrote:
> Hi ,
> I just started with lfs using book version 6.6 . I had previously
> started with book ver 6.3 and in dat , author said it is okey to build
> lfs without a partition , in a directory . But in the new version of
> the book , no such thing
On Fri, 2010-07-16 at 23:44 -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> That's a good reason. We each have our preferences. I like jhalfs for
> lfs and scripts for blfs.
Scripts for BLFS is a good challenge too, since 1) there are a lot more
packages (and flavours of build) involved, and 2), it's not all a lin
On Wed, 2010-07-21 at 15:06 -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Good point Trent. I do recommend the use of a separate 100M partition
> for /boot for all OSes installed. It avoids that kind of problem.
Only for Linux. Not much help for Windows, which Dan was asking about.
I don't think I'd use such a
On Wed, 2010-07-21 at 10:46 -0500, Dan McGhee wrote:
> My biggest conceptual error was that I thought all the static stuff got
> used only with an ISP and their stuff is all on the router.
Nope - the router will be configured to talk to the ISP, but your
computer still needs to know how to talk t
On Sun, 2010-07-25 at 00:08 -0700, Clyde Reed wrote:
> bash: ./version-check.sh: /bin/bash^M: bad interpreter: No such file
> or directory
Did you create the script with a Windows text editor such as Notepad?
The error above occurs when running a script that's been saved with
Windows-style end-of
On Sat, 2010-07-24 at 12:39 -0500, Dan McGhee wrote:
> While I like to do these sorts of things manually a couple of times, I'd
> like it to me "seamless" after I get more of my system built. To this
> end, Simon mentioned Network Manager and Neal suggested wicd as a
> possibility. Ultimately, I
On Fri, 2010-09-03 at 00:15 +0200, Martin Zajíc wrote:
> configure: error: Building GCC requires GMP 4.2+, MPFR 2.3.1+ and MPC 0.8.0+.
See comments below...
> /mnt/lfs/scripts/chap5/gccP2: line 140: --disable-libstdcxx-pch:
> command not found
That one looks like a typo - it's trying to run one
On Sat, 2010-09-04 at 20:05 +0100, Ken Moffat wrote:
> Sometimes people accidentally miss one of the packages,
> or build it but fail to install it.
Or more commonly with scripted builds, the script fails to recognise
that a command has failed, and continues with the next step.
Scripted builds *
On Sun, 2010-09-05 at 13:22 +0200, Martin Zajíc wrote:
> And errors in configure, make, make install scripts detecting
> automatically and stop build.
Are you sure? Until recently, that's what I *thought* my scripts were
doing, until one of the aforementioned "obscure problems" convinced me
otherw
On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 16:18 -0500, rhubarb...@poetworld.net wrote:
> Is there a disadvantage of using auto for file system type in the
> /etc/fstab file? I have three non-swap partitions. Why not list them
> all as auto?
I may be wrong, but I *think* auto works only for filesystems that are
re
On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 13:32 -0700, Mark Knecht wrote:
> Am I fooling myself in thinking that for a very simple hardware
> system, maybe just an EXT2 boot, EXT3 / and a swap partition, that for
> this specific machine the init scripts might be reduced to something
> like 10-20 bash commands which ge
On Sat, 2010-10-09 at 23:15 +0100, Andrew Benton wrote:
> Also, you may need to tweak your glibc check to work on systems that
> don't have executable shared libraries. On my systems almost all shared
> libraries (including /lib/libc.so.6) have premissions 644 so I get:
Out of curiosity, why do yo
On Sun, 2010-10-10 at 11:57 +0100, Andrew Benton wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Oct 2010 21:09:38 +1300
> Simon Geard wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 2010-10-09 at 23:15 +0100, Andrew Benton wrote:
> > > Also, you may need to tweak your glibc check to work on systems that
> > > don&#
On Wed, 2010-10-13 at 07:35 +0530, Madhan M wrote:
> On 13 October 2010 07:26, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Yes, but is /dev populated when you run grub-install?
> Thanks for your reply Mr.Bruce. When i issue the grub-install
> command,there is no further progress. The terminal is freezed. N
On Fri, 2010-10-22 at 08:59 -0700, Nolan wrote:
> Can I change the directory and file ownership to "lfs" with a chown, or
> is the fact that the programs were compiled as
> "root" have a detrimental effect?
The problem isn't that you're running as root - it's that you found that
you needed to run
On Mon, 2010-10-25 at 22:14 -0700, lfs wrote:
> So the question is, Should I create the gcc-build directory and *then*
> untar gmp,mpfr, mpc, from that(gcc-build) directory
No. Remember the rule - before starting on a particular page, extract
it's tarball, and cd into the directory. So, when extr
On Tue, 2010-10-26 at 15:54 -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> If you are referring to the tar commands in section 5.5.1, what is not
> clear? There is no chdir command before the tar commands. Section 5.3
> clearly says:
>
> b. Change to the directory created when the package was extracted.
> c. Fol
On Tue, 2010-10-26 at 21:23 -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Yes. We've had enough posts of people reading too much into these
> instructions. I've added some clarifying text. Let's see if that is
> enough.
For me, I think the important detail is that we extract these packages
here, so that the GC
On Fri, 2010-10-29 at 10:14 -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> We could, but we refer to the first build. I wouldn't think that this
> change is necessary. However, I didn't think the change to pass 1 was
> unclear either. The change already made was to prevent users from
> assuming things that were
On Sat, 2010-10-30 at 18:11 -0600, John Mitchell wrote:
> Thanks Andy and Ken.
>
> I suspect that some combination of modules and perhaps a missing
> initrd.img file is my issue.
>
You don't need an initrd, unless you've created some fairly exotic setup
- distros use them because they give a lot
On Wed, 2010-11-24 at 20:40 -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Your host is missing required packages. Run the script in section vii.
Just a reminder, Bruce - pages are only numbered on the page itself, not
in the table of contents. Referring to the "Host System Requirements"
page is somewhat clearer th
On Sat, 2010-11-27 at 12:19 -0600, robert wrote:
> r...@acer1:/usr/src/linux-headers-2.6.32-24-generic# make mrproper
Ok, start from here. There's no way you should have ended up with a
directory called "linux-headers-2.6.32-24-generic" by following
directions in the book - there's no source packa
On Mon, 2010-11-29 at 13:11 -0600, robert wrote:
> What has gone wrong? Am I supposed to cd /sources/linux-2.6.36.1 and
> then $make mrproper?
Yes - remember the "General Compilation Instructions":
3. For each package:
a. Using the tar program, extract the package to be built.
On Sun, 2010-12-05 at 11:45 -0500, Neal Murphy wrote:
> On Sunday 05 December 2010 10:55:13 Rosario Turco wrote:
> > ../glibc-2.12.1/configure - prefix = / tools \
> > - Host = $ LFS_TGT - build =$(../ glibc-2.12.1/scripts/config.guess) \
> > - Disable-profile - enable-add-ons \
> > - Enable-kernel
On Wed, 2010-12-08 at 14:55 -0700, Dax Mickelson wrote:
> It seems we've been so careful to ensure no hashing occurs so far in
> the build that I'm curious as to why the test 'su-tools nobody
> -s /bin/bash -c "make RUN_EXPENSIVE_TEST=yes check" doesn't have some
> sort of '+h' switch too.
>
> Obv
On Sun, 2010-12-12 at 01:22 -0500, Neal Murphy wrote:
> If that isn't it, it may be that LFS detects alien usage of swap (by Ubuntu).
> The warning may be related to suspending/hibernating Ubuntu.
Along those lines, mounting a partition simultaneously in both a VM and
it's host is a *great* way t
On Thu, 2010-12-16 at 12:57 -0700, Daryl Lee wrote:
> The rest, I have no clue about. Is there someone on this list who can point
> me in the right direction? Is there a better forum to raise the question?
Since you're working with the Linux Kernel Programming Guide book, the
obvious answer wou
On Thu, 2010-12-23 at 07:44 -0600, William Immendorf wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 12:38 AM, xinglp wrote:
> > sorry about my Egnrish ;-)
> ... what did I tell you about the fact that this thread DOES NOT
> BELONG ON THIS LIST!!!
No need to be rude about it... the world isn't going to end
On Thu, 2010-12-30 at 20:32 -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> One of the problems with a boot CD is that you will need to do that
> every time you boot. What would be better is to just do a minimal
> install of a distro like Ubuntu or Fedora and use that.
Doing an actual install seems excessive - jus
On Wed, 2011-01-05 at 20:12 -0600, al...@verizon.net wrote:
> QUESTION
> Is there a simple way of analyzing the crash, maybe with help of
> the specialists here, as opposed to formally reporting it?
Never tried, myself, but udevd supports a couple of options that might
help, --debug and --debug-tr
On Thu, 2011-01-06 at 18:36 -0600, al...@verizon.net wrote:
> The important thing for me is you appear to support me, even if
> indirectly, in my attempt to avoid kdump in my troubleshoot, if at all
> possible :)
Happy to help.
Simon.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed messag
On Mon, 2011-01-10 at 10:14 -0600, mike cutie and maia wrote:
> the book didn't tell me to put them in the source dir
You didn't say which version of the book you're using, but the
development version *does* actually tell you that...
From:
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/development/chap
On Wed, 2011-01-12 at 09:15 -0500, Neal Murphy wrote:
> While the Book may be technically correct, it isn't necessarily friendly. To
> be sure, I'm not suggesting the book be rewritten or reformatted just to
> coddle people through the entire process. But perhaps a checkbox that shows
> or
> hi
On Thu, 2011-01-13 at 10:40 -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> I'm glad gcc comes early because that's where users seem to misapply the
> instructions a lot.
Yeah, it's that bit with extracting the other packages into the GCC
directory - it throws both the people who aren't paying attention to the
gener
On Tue, 2011-02-22 at 22:38 -0500, Neal Murphy wrote:
> [rant] Digressing a little, I have a bone to pick with Kay Seivers and Greg K-
> H. Their attitude is that only symlinks should be used in /dev and created
> from udev rules (for the most part), and those symlinks may only be named
> with
>
On Tue, 2011-02-22 at 18:44 -0600, al...@verizon.net wrote:
> Unaware, many people still carry a lot of old stuff (including
> "console" and "null") on their "metal" /dev.
Not accidental. You should re-read "Preparing Virtual Kernel File
Systems" in the LFS book, specifically section 6.2.1 in th
On Wed, 2011-02-23 at 14:41 -0500, Neal Murphy wrote:
> On Wednesday 23 February 2011 04:54:10 Simon Geard wrote:
> > Are you unaware then, that udev provides the /dev/disks/by-label
> > directory, which contains volume labels as symlinks to the kernel-named
> > devices? For e
On Wed, 2011-02-23 at 11:24 -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> What am I missing? My latest only has
>
> $ ls /dev/disk
> by-id by-path by-uuid
Odd - I see those, and by-label too. My main desktop is a little old
now (about ten months old, running udev 151), but I can't see them
dropping that featur
On Wed, 2011-02-23 at 12:24 -0600, al...@verizon.net wrote:
> BTW, there is a [rant][/rant] I'm skipping, although the idea
> is not the first time to come up, where people "grow" from LFS
> to BLFS and become confused and/or _misunderstood_ about "falling
> behind" on the latest and greatest devel
On Fri, 2011-02-25 at 22:11 +1300, Simon Geard wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-02-23 at 11:24 -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> > What am I missing? My latest only has
> >
> > $ ls /dev/disk
> > by-id by-path by-uuid
>
> Odd - I see those, and by-label too. My main desktop
On Fri, 2011-02-25 at 13:21 -0600, al...@verizon.net wrote:
> 2. _Strictly_ for the record and completeness:
> I do no use Gnome. Never have.
> I use KDE (3.5.10) and Fluxbox (1.1.1).
> However, IMHO this is absolutely irrelevant as far as the thread
> subject is concerned.
> Unfortunately, the
On Fri, 2011-02-25 at 22:12 -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> I suspect you have to add -L volume-label to mke2fs (or other partition
> formatting tool) for at least one partition for by-label to be created.
Ah, yes, that makes sense - if the directory is created by the presence
of symlinks within it,
On Sun, 2011-03-13 at 20:48 -0700, Alex Bosworth wrote:
> I were making use of "-j2" make option, I wonder if would make a
> difference if I set it to "-j1" and lower the priority for make
> (perhaps set it to +20 ?) and see if that helps to keep the heat
> low !?
Changing the priority doesn't r
On Wed, 2011-04-13 at 21:04 -0500, Mike McCarty wrote:
> There is an incompatibility with using udev and /usr being a
> separate file system, which users of LFS need to be aware of.
> It is presently not possible, in general, to use udev and have
> /usr be a separately mounted file system. This is
On Thu, 2011-04-14 at 19:55 +1200, Simon Geard wrote:
> While not universal, there seems to be a growing feeling that having a
> separate /usr partition serves no useful purpose these days. The third
> of those links gives a pretty good summary of that viewpoint.
Actually, some of them
On Thu, 2011-04-14 at 09:27 -0500, Mike McCarty wrote:
> Simon Geard wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > While not universal, there seems to be a growing feeling that having a
> > separate /usr partition serves no useful purpose these days. The third
> > of those links gives
On Fri, 2011-04-15 at 10:08 -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> It seems to me that the reason for an NFS-mounted /usr is to be able to
> update all systems at once. At one time, it was to conserve disk space
> too, but the cost of disk is so cheap now, it has become a non-factor.
Somewhat redundant fo
On Sat, 2011-04-16 at 15:09 +0530, janu mam wrote:
> 6.4. Entering the Chroot Environment (page no-79)
> -
> see third paragaph
> >From this point on, there is no need to use the LFS variable anymore,
> because all work will be restricted to the LFS
> file system. Th
On Sat, 2011-04-16 at 13:29 -0500, DJ Lucas wrote:
> On 04/13/2011 09:04 PM, Mike McCarty wrote:
> > There is an incompatibility with using udev and /usr being a
> > separate file system, which users of LFS need to be aware of.
> > It is presently not possible, in general, to use udev and have
> >
On Sun, 2011-04-17 at 00:26 -0500, DJ Lucas wrote:
> Ahh...lightbulb. This is why we currently have the udev-retry in our
> bootscripts. Are the ids files accessed directly by external programs or
> by the utility libraries/programs? Provide a common library to access
> the files (if not done al
On Sun, 2011-04-17 at 00:56 -0400, Neal Murphy wrote:
> Gently illuminating a point that does not necessarily invalidate your whole
> argument: pci.ids and the IDs used in drivers are not necessarily in sync.
> Udev should depend solely on the IDs compiled into the drivers; it can easily
> obtai
On Sun, 2011-04-17 at 12:33 +0100, Andrew Benton wrote:
> I think that the idea of doing away with /usr and just installing
> everything into / is interesting as it would simplify the structure of
> the directories. I also think that making the change would be like
> poking yourself in the eye with
On Sun, 2011-04-17 at 13:41 -0500, DJ Lucas wrote:
> On 04/17/2011 01:31 PM, DJ Lucas wrote:
>
> >
> > Anyway, udev starts 4th in the startup scripts, it runs across a uevent
> > that uses a rule found in /usr, and it fails to create the device node.
>
> Errit creates the device node, but fai
1 - 100 of 363 matches
Mail list logo
