Le 17/02/2014 16:58, Fernando de Oliveira a écrit : > Em 17-02-2014 11:21, akhiezer escreveu: >>> Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2014 09:10:17 -0300 >>> From: Fernando de Oliveira <[email protected]> >>> To: BLFS Development List <[email protected]> >>> Subject: [blfs-dev] lsb_release configuration [Was: ... Iced Tea 2.4.1 and >>> iced tea 2.4.5 sed unknown option to `s'] >>> >>> Em 17-02-2014 07:53, Fernando de Oliveira escreveu: >>>> Em 17-02-2014 03:47, [email protected] escreveu: >>> >>>>> Thanks for all the effort. As requested the output is: >>>>> lsb_release -ds "7.4" (the " are displayed in the output) >>>>> lsb_release -is n/a >>>>> >>>>> Not exactly sure what you wish me to try. >>>>> >>>>> I have no problem with attempting to install a later version if needs be. >>>>> >>>>> Please let me know what to try. I did install the version listed as >>>>> stable in the 7.4 book. It was that one which I replaced the / with a % >>>>> sign. Was the only way to get it to build, and hence why I am not sure if >>>>> it was a successful build or not. >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> >>>>> Christopher. >>>>> >>>> >>>> I think I know what happened. You forgot or did not properly >>>> >>>> http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/7.4/chapter09/theend.html >>>> (before doing the following as root, backup, if you have them, the two >>>> files, just for later comparison, so you will see the problem): >>>> >>>> echo 7.4 > /etc/lfs-release >>>> >>>> In the following, replace <your name here> by what you want the codename >>>> to be. In may case, it is set by jhalfs to "lfs-jhalfs". In your case, >>>> you can use christopher, lfs-christopher, anything you want. >>>> >>>> cat > /etc/lsb-release << "EOF" >>>> DISTRIB_ID="Linux From Scratch" >>>> DISTRIB_RELEASE="7.4" >>>> DISTRIB_CODENAME="<your name here>" >>>> DISTRIB_DESCRIPTION="Linux From Scratch" >>>> EOF >>>> >>>> This should solve your problems. >>>> >>>> You must do this, other software needs the lsb_release output. >>>> >>>> Thus, >>>> >>>> lsb_release -ds output comes from DISTRIB_DESCRIPTION >>>> lsb_release -is output comes from DISTRIB_ID >>>> >>>> Notice, in the referred page: Linux Standards Base (LSB) >>>> >>> This problem appeared in the support page. Second time that lsb_release >>> gives problem, if not installed or correctly configured. So, it seems >>> that it is becoming increasingly more important. >>> >>> I am thinking of changing the page in BLFS to include the configuration >>> file, duplicating, somehow, what is in LFS. >>> >> >> - usually a bad idea; maintenance headache, quickly gets out-of-sync >> (& then just plain wrong wrt relevance), thus causng new problems, etc. > Sorry, akh, I do not agree with this. > > After reading below, I believe you are thinking that lsb_release is on > LFS, but no, installation as a package is in BLFS. But the configuration > is in LFS. This is the problem. Took a while this morning for me to get > the two parts together, expected the configuration in BLFS (as it was > originally), and recalled finally that it was in LFS. That was the > reason I told him to install lsb_release. I do not know the icedtea installer, so I do not know how it gets its information about the LSB. But I think the best would be to consider that everything, which is in LFS, is installed (including /etc/lsb-release), and that lsb-release executable is optional. Ideally, then, the icedtea installer should be taught not to use the executable. Now, if the executable is needed for an easier installation of icedtea-JDK, then it should go to recommended.
Regards Pierre -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
