Em 14-02-2014 06:14, m...@pc-networking-services.com escreveu: > Hello, > > This is my second attempt to post this here. I beat the confirmation > e-mail by posting to the list and receieve the bounce that it was waiting > the list moderators approval and that was on the 5th. > > I have also posted this error on the devleopers website on the 3rd of Feb > and no responce there either.
I cannot find your message in my archives nor at: https://www.mail-archive.com/blfs-dev@linuxfromscratch.org/maillist.html What do you mean by "developers website"? Please, can you give me the address, or title of the post, something to help me finding your report from the 3rd? > > I really do not know how you can say that compiling java from scratch > following EXACTLY the instructions given works on a BLFS build as it > clearly does NOT. Though this is the output from a later version, the at > the time book version 2.4.1 gives the same unknow option to s sed error > message. I have no problem, in different machines. > > I do not know enough about the substitution strings in sed to know if by > chaning the / to another character if it would actually in an unknown way > create errors down the track if compilation was successful. It would seem > to me that no one has actually followed the printed instructions through > to see if it actually does compile. > > I am by no means a newbie to linux. I have done technical writing and > have followed through the instructions that I wrote to make sure there > were no errors. > > make[5]: Entering directory > `/opt/icedtea-2.4.5/openjdk-boot/jdk/make/java/version' > /bin/mkdir -p /opt/icedtea-2.4.5/generated.build/sun/misc > rm -f /opt/icedtea-2.4.5/generated.build/sun/misc/Version.java > rm -f /opt/icedtea-2.4.5/generated.build/sun/misc/Version.java.temp > /bin/sed -e 's/@@launcher_name@@/java/g' \ > -e 's/@@java_version@@/1.7.0_51-BLFS/g' \ > -e 's/@@java_runtime_version@@/1.7.0_51-BLFS-b31/g' \ > -e 's/@@jdk_derivative_name@@/IcedTea 2.4.5/g' \ > -e 's/@@distro_name@@/n/a/g' \ As akhiezer have written, this seems to be the problem. I have it different in one machine: {{{ $ xzgrep s/@@distro_name@@ OpenJDK-1.7.0.51-2.4.5-* OpenJDK-1.7.0.51-2.4.5-2014.01.29-14h56m30s.log.xz: -e 's/@@distro_name@@/linux-gnu/g' \ OpenJDK-1.7.0.51-2.4.5-2014.01.29-14h56m30s.log.xz: -e 's/@@distro_name@@/linux-gnu/g' \ }}} and also different in another machine: {{{ $ xzgrep s/@@distro_name@@ OpenJDK-1.7.0.51-2.4.5-* OpenJDK-1.7.0.51-2.4.5-2014.01.29-18h12m38s.log.xz: -e 's/@@distro_name@@/Linux From Scratch/g' \ OpenJDK-1.7.0.51-2.4.5-2014.01.29-18h12m38s.log.xz: -e 's/@@distro_name@@/Linux From Scratch/g' \ }}} I am not sure why you have the problem. I use one more switch: --with-pkgversion='7u51-2.4.5-blfs' but this is not relevant, I think. I believe the problem is that it is not getting your distro_name correctly and cannot tell why, so I will give a guess suggestion. I would suggest that you install lsb_release-1.4, because it seems it is from there it is picking the distro from one of my machines. http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/svn/postlfs/lsb-release.html > -e 's/@@distro_package_version@@//g' \ I also have: -e 's/@@distro_package_version@@/'7u51-2.4.5-blfs'/g' \ but this is due to the switch I use, as written above. > -e 's/@@java_runtime_name@@/OpenJDK Runtime Environment/g' \ > -e 's/@@jdk_revid@@//g' \ > -e 's/@@hotspot_revid@@//g' \ > ../../../src/share/classes/sun/misc/Version.java.template > > /opt/icedtea-2.4.5/generated.build/sun/misc/Version.java.temp > /bin/sed: -e expression #5, char 21: unknown option to `s' > make[5]: *** [/opt/icedtea-2.4.5/generated.build/sun/misc/Version.java] > Error 1 > make[5]: Leaving directory > `/opt/icedtea-2.4.5/openjdk-boot/jdk/make/java/version' > make[4]: *** [all] Error 1 > make[4]: Leaving directory `/opt/icedtea-2.4.5/openjdk-boot/jdk/make/java' > > > I really would appreciate it if someone could actually check and see if > they get a successful compilation without going through and having to edit > the Makefile. It is a long build for me as I only have a duel core > processor. I tried the compilation several times, each time totally > deleting the build directory to make sure that there were no left over > files. > > It would seem that if the developer is not even interested in > acknowledging the error that we are on our own with it. The developer is interested, but it is the first time he is hearing about this problem. > > Regards, > > Christopher > -- []s, Fernando -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
