Re: Various issues with the book
On Sat, 24 Feb 2007, Dan Nicholson wrote: > On 2/24/07, Bryan Kadzban <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > OTOH, I don't know why most of these people think it's the CLFS package > > either -- are they doing a search on linux-headers and finding that > > package? Or are they doing something else that's pointing them there? > > I don't think any of these suggestions should be used unless they help > > fix the root of the user confusion -- and I don't know what that is for > > sure. > > This was the same reason I couldn't come up with anything. I'm worried > that just putting the version number after Linux won't help people in > this situation. But it'll have to do until an actual confused user > suggests something different. Well, I'm not actually confused, but I think my view on that topic might be helpful nevertheless. In my case the "unknown thing" pointing to Jims headers is my memory. There was a time when those headers were "the way to go" to get sanitized headers. Since that time there is a connection (although no strong one any more) between the term "linux-headers" and the requirement to get a package with that name. The package is actively maintained, and accordingly my scripts that regularly harvest the web for new package version from the original sites still get new versions of it. I remember having thought months ago: didn't they want to use the headers provided by the kernel build target? Why is there still a page called linux-headers? A quick look into it ended that estonishment, the content is more than obvious. I think naming it linux-$version-headers would have prevented me from having to look into it, but I do not like version numbers in places were they are not required or appropriate. If there is the wish to rename it to avoid confusion I would vote for somethimg more descriptive just as in other cases that do things other than just installing a certain package. E.g. installinglinuxheaders. Uwe -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Various issues with the book
> > I will start tomorrow another build with the updated LFS-SVN code (if the > new patches are availables for download at that time) and without chapter05 > M4. Doned also. Conclusions: M4 can be romoved from Chapter05. I'm doing the commit now. We must to investigate wy now ICA/farces tests shows that /usr/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.1.2/cc1 and /usr/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.1.2/cc1plus differs. -- Manuel Canales Esparcia Usuario de LFS nº2886: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org LFS en castellano: http://www.escomposlinux.org/lfs-es http://www.lfs-es.info TLDP-ES: http://es.tldp.org -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Various issues with the book
El Domingo, 25 de Febrero de 2007 00:43, Ken Moffat escribió: > Sorry I'm a bit later than I'd like in replying to this, but I saw > these running farce on the book as it was in December. Didn't > bother reporting it, so feel free to moan at me. Thanks for remembering that now. My second ICA/farce build has finished just now, and it corfims that that GCC binaries differs also having M4 on chapter05. That builds has been done before the GCC, Glibc, and DB updates done by Matthew this morning. I will start tomorrow another build with the updated LFS-SVN code (if the new patches are availables for download at that time) and without chapter05 M4. -- Manuel Canales Esparcia Usuario de LFS nº2886: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org LFS en castellano: http://www.escomposlinux.org/lfs-es http://www.lfs-es.info TLDP-ES: http://es.tldp.org -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Various issues with the book
On Sat, Feb 24, 2007 at 06:41:27PM +0100, M.Canales.es wrote: > El Sábado, 24 de Febrero de 2007 12:40, M.Canales.es escribió: > > > > > I'm doing the ICA/farce build now. > > > > ICA and farce reports this differs: > > FAIL: /usr/lib/libstdc++.la is different > FAIL: /usr/lib/libsupc++.la is different > > That two has been here from always. > > FAIL: /usr/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.1.1/cc1 differs after stripping and > processing > FAIL: /usr/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.1.1/cc1plus differs after stripping > and processing > > That two are new, at least for me, but I'm not sure yet if are due the M4 > removal or not. Sorry I'm a bit later than I'd like in replying to this, but I saw these running farce on the book as it was in December. Didn't bother reporting it, so feel free to moan at me. Unrelatedly, I'm probably going to be less active, maybe even disappear from the lists, for the next week or two (family reasons). ĸen -- das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Various issues with the book
El Sábado, 24 de Febrero de 2007 21:38, Jeremy Huntwork escribió: > I had thought that the alphabetical branch didn't even touch chapter 5? There was some changes, included the removal of the commented-out Bison and Flex lines, when doned the merge. See svn diff -r7279:7489 chapter05/chapter05.xml -- Manuel Canales Esparcia Usuario de LFS nº2886: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org LFS en castellano: http://www.escomposlinux.org/lfs-es http://www.lfs-es.info TLDP-ES: http://es.tldp.org -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Various issues with the book
El Sábado, 24 de Febrero de 2007 21:34, M.Canales.es escribió: > I'm doing now a new ICA/farce build but with M4 to see if that two binaries > differs also or not. Another cause could be that my system have now a very big load and ocasionally I have aleatories build fails (two times in the last four days, one building Glibc and another running the Autoconf testsuite). That it what i'm doing two or three build of each type to do the tests. But reports from others folks will very very apreciated. -- Manuel Canales Esparcia Usuario de LFS nº2886: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org LFS en castellano: http://www.escomposlinux.org/lfs-es http://www.lfs-es.info TLDP-ES: http://es.tldp.org -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Various issues with the book
Dan Nicholson wrote: > Hmm, it looks like someone removed the old commented entries for bison > and flex in Ch.5. Oh, that was our work in alphabetical. I guess if we I had thought that the alphabetical branch didn't even touch chapter 5? -- JH -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Various issues with the book
El Sábado, 24 de Febrero de 2007 21:28, Dan Nicholson escribió: > > Did you ever find out if the diffs in cc1 were related to the m4 removal? > I'm doing now a new ICA/farce build but with M4 to see if that two binaries differs also or not. If they not differ, M4 should be retained and maybe added to GCC dependencies list. If they not differ, M4 can be removed but we will need to investigate what causes that that files differs. -- Manuel Canales Esparcia Usuario de LFS nº2886: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org LFS en castellano: http://www.escomposlinux.org/lfs-es http://www.lfs-es.info TLDP-ES: http://es.tldp.org -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Various issues with the book
On 2/24/07, M.Canales.es <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > El Sábado, 24 de Febrero de 2007 12:58, Alexander E. Patrakov escribió: > > > Thanks. Could you please patch your local copy of the book and determine > > via jhalfs whether it is still usable with HJL binutils, if one doesn't > > drop m4? If not, then I really see no reason to keep it. > > HJL Binutils complaints about missing Bison and Flex, thus being M4 missing > also (if it can be removed) is not worse than the current situation, IMHO. Bison and flex depend on m4, correct? So, it's exactly the same. The current policy is that we don't care about HJL until we need to. The bison and flex pages are still in the repo, just not tied into chapter05.xml. Hmm, it looks like someone removed the old commented entries for bison and flex in Ch.5. Oh, that was our work in alphabetical. I guess if we ever need to get the HJL dependencies back in, the Ch. 5 order will have to be reworked since m4 would have to move to the beginning (or somewhere else before bison). Did you ever find out if the diffs in cc1 were related to the m4 removal? -- Dan -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Various issues with the book
El Sábado, 24 de Febrero de 2007 12:58, Alexander E. Patrakov escribió: > Thanks. Could you please patch your local copy of the book and determine > via jhalfs whether it is still usable with HJL binutils, if one doesn't > drop m4? If not, then I really see no reason to keep it. HJL Binutils complaints about missing Bison and Flex, thus being M4 missing also (if it can be removed) is not worse than the current situation, IMHO. -- Manuel Canales Esparcia Usuario de LFS nº2886: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org LFS en castellano: http://www.escomposlinux.org/lfs-es http://www.lfs-es.info TLDP-ES: http://es.tldp.org -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Various issues with the book
El Sábado, 24 de Febrero de 2007 12:40, M.Canales.es escribió: > > I'm doing the ICA/farce build now. > ICA and farce reports this differs: FAIL: /usr/lib/libstdc++.la is different FAIL: /usr/lib/libsupc++.la is different That two has been here from always. FAIL: /usr/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.1.1/cc1 differs after stripping and processing FAIL: /usr/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.1.1/cc1plus differs after stripping and processing That two are new, at least for me, but I'm not sure yet if are due the M4 removal or not. Looks like another set of builds using current SVN (i.e, using gcc-4.1.2 and the Glibc update branch patch) might be needed before taking a decission about the Chapter05 M4 removal. -- Manuel Canales Esparcia Usuario de LFS nº2886: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org LFS en castellano: http://www.escomposlinux.org/lfs-es http://www.lfs-es.info TLDP-ES: http://es.tldp.org -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Various issues with the book
On 2/24/07, Bryan Kadzban <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > OTOH, I don't know why most of these people think it's the CLFS package > either -- are they doing a search on linux-headers and finding that > package? Or are they doing something else that's pointing them there? > I don't think any of these suggestions should be used unless they help > fix the root of the user confusion -- and I don't know what that is for > sure. This was the same reason I couldn't come up with anything. I'm worried that just putting the version number after Linux won't help people in this situation. But it'll have to do until an actual confused user suggests something different. Unfortunately, I don't know how many confused users read lfs-dev. I'm gonna throw it onto support and see if anyone takes the bait. -- Dan -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Various issues with the book
El Sábado, 24 de Febrero de 2007 14:49, Matthew Burgess escribió: > No complaints here, Manuel. Thanks! Done in r7942 and r7943 -- Manuel Canales Esparcia Usuario de LFS nº2886: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org LFS en castellano: http://www.escomposlinux.org/lfs-es http://www.lfs-es.info TLDP-ES: http://es.tldp.org -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Various issues with the book
On Saturday 24 February 2007 13:44, M.Canales.es wrote: > Also I vote for changing the pages title to "Linux-2.6.20 API Headers" > > I can do both changes later today if there are no complaints. No complaints here, Manuel. Thanks! -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Various issues with the book
El Sábado, 24 de Febrero de 2007 14:30, Bryan Kadzban escribió:
> Or, since I'm not at all sure how the automatic indexing stuff works yet
> in DocBook ({indexterm}, etc.), perhaps it would be possible to just
> remove the hyphens for that package, and call it "Linux 2.6.20 Headers"
> or "Linux Headers", so those strings show up in the index (and on the
> rest of the pages)?
Right, the Index need be fixed. It uses yet the tagging inherited for when
using the Linux-libc-headers package.
Also I vote for changing the pages title to "Linux-2.6.20 API Headers"
I can do both changes later today if there are no complaints.
--
Manuel Canales Esparcia
Usuario de LFS nº2886: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org
LFS en castellano: http://www.escomposlinux.org/lfs-es http://www.lfs-es.info
TLDP-ES: http://es.tldp.org
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Various issues with the book
Dan Nicholson wrote:
> On 2/20/07, Dan Nicholson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On 2/19/07, Chris Staub <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> 1. Perhaps it should be made somewhat clearer that the
>>> "Linux-Headers" installation comes from the kernel tarball. More
>>> than one user has come into the IRC chat asking if it was the
>>> CLFS "Linux-Headers" package.
>>
>> No kidding. I don't know what else can be said, though. The Ch. 5
>> page says "This is done by way of sanitizing various C header files
>> that are shipped in the Linux kernel source tarball".
>>
>> I'd think the only reason to specify the mechanism would be if you
>> weren't using the scripts in the kernel. If you can think of
>> anything, though, I'll add it.
>
> Could someone suggest some text here? I really don't know what to
> write.
I don't think I can come up with any way to make the text clearer, but
what might help is to change the name of the package. Something like
"Linux-&linux-version;-Headers" instead of putting the version at the
end, perhaps? That way it might be a bit more obvious that it's not a
package named "linux-headers", and hopefully that makes it a bit more
obvious that it isn't CLFS's linux-headers package either.
Or, since I'm not at all sure how the automatic indexing stuff works yet
in DocBook ({indexterm}, etc.), perhaps it would be possible to just
remove the hyphens for that package, and call it "Linux 2.6.20 Headers"
or "Linux Headers", so those strings show up in the index (and on the
rest of the pages)?
Or better yet, call it "Linux API Headers", or something else that could
indicate its function and also split "Linux" and "Headers" apart?
OTOH, I don't know why most of these people think it's the CLFS package
either -- are they doing a search on linux-headers and finding that
package? Or are they doing something else that's pointing them there?
I don't think any of these suggestions should be used unless they help
fix the root of the user confusion -- and I don't know what that is for
sure.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Various issues with the book
M.Canales.es wrote: > What's the download URL for current HJL binutils? http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/devel/binutils/binutils-2.17.50.0.12.tar.bz2 -- Alexander E. Patrakov -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Various issues with the book
El Sábado, 24 de Febrero de 2007 12:58, Alexander E. Patrakov escribió: > Thanks. Could you please patch your local copy of the book and determine > via jhalfs whether it is still usable with HJL binutils, if one doesn't > drop m4? If not, then I really see no reason to keep it. What's the download URL for current HJL binutils? I will try it after finished the current ICA/farce build. -- Manuel Canales Esparcia Usuario de LFS nº2886: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org LFS en castellano: http://www.escomposlinux.org/lfs-es http://www.lfs-es.info TLDP-ES: http://es.tldp.org -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Various issues with the book
M.Canales.es wrote: > A previous sucessful build with all final system testsuites enabled show that > the removal of M4 from chapter05 don't afect the testsuites. Thanks. Could you please patch your local copy of the book and determine via jhalfs whether it is still usable with HJL binutils, if one doesn't drop m4? If not, then I really see no reason to keep it. -- Alexander E. Patrakov -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Various issues with the book
El Sábado, 24 de Febrero de 2007 05:49, Dan Nicholson escribió: > > Manuel, since you're all set up to do the ICA builds with jhalfs, > could you remove m4 from Ch. 5 and see if anything happens? I'm doing the ICA/farce build now. A previous sucessful build with all final system testsuites enabled show that the removal of M4 from chapter05 don't afect the testsuites. -- Manuel Canales Esparcia Usuario de LFS nº2886: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org LFS en castellano: http://www.escomposlinux.org/lfs-es http://www.lfs-es.info TLDP-ES: http://es.tldp.org -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Various issues with the book
On 2/20/07, Dan Nicholson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 2/19/07, Chris Staub <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > 1. Perhaps it should be made somewhat clearer that the "Linux-Headers"
> > installation comes from the kernel tarball. More than one user has come
> > into the IRC chat asking if it was the CLFS "Linux-Headers" package.
>
> No kidding. I don't know what else can be said, though. The Ch. 5 page
> says "This is done by way of sanitizing various C header files that
> are shipped in the Linux kernel source tarball".
>
> I'd think the only reason to specify the mechanism would be if you
> weren't using the scripts in the kernel. If you can think of anything,
> though, I'll add it.
Could someone suggest some text here? I really don't know what to write.
> > 2. The toolchain-adjustment section says that you can edit the specs
> > file by hand, but there is no specs file at all until it's generated by
> > that command gcc | sed command.
Fixed.
> > 3. Is m4 really needed in Chapter 5? I thought the only reason it was
> > there was because of Binutils, but it doesn't need m4 now...
Hopefully Manuel can rip off an ICA build to check this out. I'm not
in a position for that right now, but I can set it up if needed.
> > 4. Inetutils installs programs for ipv6, including a "ping6" program.
> > Since the FHS says that ping must be in /bin, it would seem to make
> > sense to put ping6 there too...this is what we have done in CLFS.
>
> I don't think I agree with that, but I don't feel really strongly either way.
I didn't change this since I don't really agree. Someone else can
certainly make that change, though.
> > 5. The instructions for Man-DB eliminate the reference to /usr/man in
> > the manpage search path to remove potential redundant results (since
> > /usr/man is a symlink to /usr/share/man). The same should be done for
> > /usr/local/man.
Fixed.
> > 6. Are the instructions in Texinfo for optionally installing TeX stuff
> > really needed? First, there is no explanation for what TeX is. Second,
> > there is no description of what exactly is installed ("components
> > belonging in a TeX installation" - what components?). We simply removed
> > that in CLFS.
I left this alone for now since I like having the TeX commands in
there. I think this should be discussed some more if it's going to be
changed.
> > 7. The Udev page says that Udev does not install any rules by default.
> > Actually, it does. Right make install for Udev...
Fixed.
> > Do we want to keep those or replace them? In CLFS we simply eliminate
> > the contents of /etc/udev/rules.d immediately after installing Udev.
As stated before, I think we're trying to use the upstream rules files
as much as possible.
> > Also, the "make install-doc" command for the LFS Udev rules creates the
> > /usr/share/doc/udev-105 directory so the command for installing the
> > documentation for writing Udev rules should be able to be shortened to
> > "install -m644 -v docs/writing_udev_rules/index.html
> > /usr/share/doc/udev-105".
Fixed.
> > Also, I have attached a patch with a few text fixes for the book.
>
Applied. Thanks, Chris.
--
Dan
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Various issues with the book
On 2/21/07, M.Canales.es <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > El Martes, 20 de Febrero de 2007 09:22, Dan Nicholson escribió: > > > > 3. Is m4 really needed in Chapter 5? I thought the only reason it was > > > there was because of Binutils, but it doesn't need m4 now... > > > > Is that why? I have no idea, and I think you're probably most > > qualified since you did all the work on the dependencies. The other > > things that need it early in Ch. 6 are bison and autoconf, and they're > > taken care of. I just looked through my logs, and gcc checks for m4, > > but I don't think it uses it. > > > > It could probably be removed or commented out, but I think someone > > will have to do an ICA build to see what happens. Manuel, since you're all set up to do the ICA builds with jhalfs, could you remove m4 from Ch. 5 and see if anything happens? -- Dan -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Various issues with the book
El Martes, 20 de Febrero de 2007 09:22, Dan Nicholson escribió: > > 3. Is m4 really needed in Chapter 5? I thought the only reason it was > > there was because of Binutils, but it doesn't need m4 now... > > Is that why? I have no idea, and I think you're probably most > qualified since you did all the work on the dependencies. The other > things that need it early in Ch. 6 are bison and autoconf, and they're > taken care of. I just looked through my logs, and gcc checks for m4, > but I don't think it uses it. > > It could probably be removed or commented out, but I think someone > will have to do an ICA build to see what happens. I'm starting now a ICA/farce build to test that and to verify that the warning in the Bzip2 instructions about needing to run rm /usr/bin/bz* if you reinstall is no longer needed with the latest version. T -- Manuel Canales Esparcia Usuario de LFS nº2886: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org LFS en castellano: http://www.escomposlinux.org/lfs-es http://www.lfs-es.info TLDP-ES: http://es.tldp.org -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Various issues with the book
On 2/19/07, Chris Staub <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 1. Perhaps it should be made somewhat clearer that the "Linux-Headers"
> installation comes from the kernel tarball. More than one user has come
> into the IRC chat asking if it was the CLFS "Linux-Headers" package.
No kidding. I don't know what else can be said, though. The Ch. 5 page
says "This is done by way of sanitizing various C header files that
are shipped in the Linux kernel source tarball".
I'd think the only reason to specify the mechanism would be if you
weren't using the scripts in the kernel. If you can think of anything,
though, I'll add it.
> 2. The toolchain-adjustment section says that you can edit the specs
> file by hand, but there is no specs file at all until it's generated by
> that command gcc | sed command.
Nice catch.
> 3. Is m4 really needed in Chapter 5? I thought the only reason it was
> there was because of Binutils, but it doesn't need m4 now...
Is that why? I have no idea, and I think you're probably most
qualified since you did all the work on the dependencies. The other
things that need it early in Ch. 6 are bison and autoconf, and they're
taken care of. I just looked through my logs, and gcc checks for m4,
but I don't think it uses it.
It could probably be removed or commented out, but I think someone
will have to do an ICA build to see what happens.
> 4. Inetutils installs programs for ipv6, including a "ping6" program.
> Since the FHS says that ping must be in /bin, it would seem to make
> sense to put ping6 there too...this is what we have done in CLFS.
I don't think I agree with that, but I don't feel really strongly either way.
> 5. The instructions for Man-DB eliminate the reference to /usr/man in
> the manpage search path to remove potential redundant results (since
> /usr/man is a symlink to /usr/share/man). The same should be done for
> /usr/local/man.
Good point.
> 6. Are the instructions in Texinfo for optionally installing TeX stuff
> really needed? First, there is no explanation for what TeX is. Second,
> there is no description of what exactly is installed ("components
> belonging in a TeX installation" - what components?). We simply removed
> that in CLFS.
I like that. You can enable an additional part with no extra
dependencies. And we don't install texinfo in BLFS, so the TeX sources
would just float away unless you were around before to know that they
exist.
I'd be alright with adding a little explanation about what they are.
Maybe all that's needed is a link to a site explaining TeX.
> 7. The Udev page says that Udev does not install any rules by default.
> Actually, it does. Right make install for Udev...
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/home/lfs/sources/udev-105# ls /etc/udev/rules.d/
> 60-cdrom_id.rules 75-persistent-net-generator.rules
> 75-cd-aliases-generator.rules
OK.
> Do we want to keep those or replace them? In CLFS we simply eliminate
> the contents of /etc/udev/rules.d immediately after installing Udev.
We actually use them in LFS, and we decided not to replace any rules
provided upstream (unless they're broken). The udev-config tarball
only has a couple rules files and some documentation.
> Also, the "make install-doc" command for the LFS Udev rules creates the
> /usr/share/doc/udev-105 directory so the command for installing the
> documentation for writing Udev rules should be able to be shortened to
> "install -m644 -v docs/writing_udev_rules/index.html
> /usr/share/doc/udev-105".
Thanks.
> Also, I have attached a patch with a few text fixes for the book.
Those all look good. Thanks, Chris.
--
Dan
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Various issues with the book
1. Perhaps it should be made somewhat clearer that the "Linux-Headers"
installation comes from the kernel tarball. More than one user has come
into the IRC chat asking if it was the CLFS "Linux-Headers" package.
2. The toolchain-adjustment section says that you can edit the specs
file by hand, but there is no specs file at all until it's generated by
that command gcc | sed command.
3. Is m4 really needed in Chapter 5? I thought the only reason it was
there was because of Binutils, but it doesn't need m4 now...
4. Inetutils installs programs for ipv6, including a "ping6" program.
Since the FHS says that ping must be in /bin, it would seem to make
sense to put ping6 there too...this is what we have done in CLFS.
5. The instructions for Man-DB eliminate the reference to /usr/man in
the manpage search path to remove potential redundant results (since
/usr/man is a symlink to /usr/share/man). The same should be done for
/usr/local/man.
6. Are the instructions in Texinfo for optionally installing TeX stuff
really needed? First, there is no explanation for what TeX is. Second,
there is no description of what exactly is installed ("components
belonging in a TeX installation" - what components?). We simply removed
that in CLFS.
7. The Udev page says that Udev does not install any rules by default.
Actually, it does. Right make install for Udev...
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/home/lfs/sources/udev-105# ls /etc/udev/rules.d/
60-cdrom_id.rules 75-persistent-net-generator.rules
75-cd-aliases-generator.rules
Do we want to keep those or replace them? In CLFS we simply eliminate
the contents of /etc/udev/rules.d immediately after installing Udev.
Also, the "make install-doc" command for the LFS Udev rules creates the
/usr/share/doc/udev-105 directory so the command for installing the
documentation for writing Udev rules should be able to be shortened to
"install -m644 -v docs/writing_udev_rules/index.html
/usr/share/doc/udev-105".
Also, I have attached a patch with a few text fixes for the book. First,
the warning in the Bzip2 instructions about needing to run rm
/usr/bin/bz* if you reinstall is no longer needed with the latest
version. There are also corrections for the number of Autoconf tests
that use Automake, and more accurate descriptions of what "make install"
and "make install-libs" do in E2fsprogs.
Index: trunk/BOOK/chapter06/bzip2.xml
===
--- trunk/BOOK/chapter06/bzip2.xml (revision 7926)
+++ trunk/BOOK/chapter06/bzip2.xml (working copy)
@@ -66,10 +66,6 @@
make
-If reinstalling Bzip2, perform
-rm -vf /usr/bin/bz* first, otherwise the following
-make install will fail.
-
Install the programs:
make PREFIX=/usr install
Index: trunk/BOOK/chapter06/kernfs.xml
===
--- trunk/BOOK/chapter06/kernfs.xml (revision 7926)
+++ trunk/BOOK/chapter06/kernfs.xml (working copy)
@@ -59,7 +59,7 @@
create a mirror of a directory or mount point to some other location. Use
the following command to achieve this:
-mount --bind /dev $LFS/dev
+mount -v --bind /dev $LFS/dev
Index: trunk/BOOK/chapter06/e2fsprogs.xml
===
--- trunk/BOOK/chapter06/e2fsprogs.xml (revision 7926)
+++ trunk/BOOK/chapter06/e2fsprogs.xml (working copy)
@@ -42,8 +42,8 @@
sed -i -e 's@/bin/rm@/tools&@'
lib/blkid/test_probe.in
-It is recommended that E2fsprogs be built in a subdirectory of
-the source tree:
+The E2fsprogs documentation recommends that the package be built in
+a subdirectory of the source tree:
mkdir -v build
cd build
@@ -106,11 +106,11 @@
for details on creating and enabling
swap space.
-Install the binaries and documentation:
+Install the binaries, documentation, and shared libraries:
make install
-Install the shared libraries:
+Install the static libraries and headers:
make install-libs
Index: trunk/BOOK/chapter06/autoconf.xml
===
--- trunk/BOOK/chapter06/autoconf.xml (revision 7926)
+++ trunk/BOOK/chapter06/autoconf.xml (working copy)
@@ -45,7 +45,7 @@
To test the results, issue:
make check.
-This takes a long time, about 3 SBUs. In addition, 2 test are skipped
+This takes a long time, about 3 SBUs. In addition, 6 tests are skipped
that use Automake. For full test coverage, Autoconf can be re-tested
after Automake has been installed.
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
