Re: RFC: Create a new-rendering-tools branch
El Sábado, 24 de Febrero de 2007 05:20, Bruce Dubbs escribió: Dan Nicholson wrote: Is this still going to happen. Manuel is obviously going to drive any changes, but I think any branches have to be created by Matthew or Bruce. Actually, anyone with commit privs can create a tag or branch. It's just a svn command away. Right, I'm waiting the DocBook-XSL-1.72.1 release (just few minutes ago was committed another bug fix into the extensions/ subdirectory) What we should do as soon is possible is to update the sources to DocBook-XML-4.5 DTD, but that depend on having the package installed at least on quantum, and anduin. Bruce, some timeline about that? Also BLFS should close #2241 to allow editors to install the new DTD on their hosts. -- 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 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: Testing required: SVN build segfaults on stripping chapter6
El Sábado, 24 de Febrero de 2007 00:36, Bruce Dubbs escribió: Manuel, I've only been following this casually. What was different about the chroot command that would cause a segfault? The first issue was that chapter06/115-strippingagain script was using #!/bin/bash as the shabang, thus after stripping libreadline and/or libhistory the subshell hangs, leading to a make: Error 126 That has been fixed changing that script shabang to #!/tools/bin/bash The second issue, not fixed yet, is that when resuming a failed chroot build after installing Chapte06 Bash, $LFS/bin/bash exist and is the final bash binary (not the link to /tools/bin/bash created at the begining of the chapter), thus make mk_CHROOT will use $LFS/bin/bash as the $SHELL instead using /tools/bin/bash (like does on a clean build), segfaulting when running the strip command. To fix that we need to force the mk_CHROOT target to allways use /tools/bin/bash as their $SHELL, but withiut messing the shell used by sub-make process launched by build scripts :-/ -- 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: Testing required: SVN build segfaults on stripping chapter6
M.Canales.es wrote: El Viernes, 23 de Febrero de 2007 20:26, M.Canales.es escribió: That should corfim that the issue is in jhalfs, not related with the book or the GCC/Glibc planned updates. And fixed. After knowing what was causing the segfault in both a full build and later in my partial build tests, the fix was terribly obvious :-/ Does this mean that LFS LiveCD 6.3-pre2 has to use jhalfs from SVN trunk? -- Alexander E. Patrakov -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Testing required: SVN build segfaults on stripping chapter6
El Sábado, 24 de Febrero de 2007 13:02, Alexander E. Patrakov escribió: Does this mean that LFS LiveCD 6.3-pre2 has to use jhalfs from SVN trunk? We want to release jhalfs-2.2 in a week or so. Plus that fixes it will have also other fixes for CLFSx books and add support for BLFS-6.2. -- 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 12:58, 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: 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
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
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
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 14:49, 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
[Fwd: [Clfs-dev] Dead Link]
---BeginMessage--- Hello, I found dead Link(s) in the Documentation: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/svn/postlfs/nano.html The Link to this Page is dead: ftp://ftp.uni-koeln.de/editor/nano-2.0.1.tar.gz Thanks Daniel signature.asc Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil ___ Clfs-dev mailing list Clfs-dev@lists.cross-lfs.org http://lists.cross-lfs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/clfs-dev ---End Message--- -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html 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: RFC: Create a new-rendering-tools branch
M.Canales.es wrote: El Sábado, 24 de Febrero de 2007 05:20, Bruce Dubbs escribió: Dan Nicholson wrote: Is this still going to happen. Manuel is obviously going to drive any changes, but I think any branches have to be created by Matthew or Bruce. Actually, anyone with commit privs can create a tag or branch. It's just a svn command away. Right, I'm waiting the DocBook-XSL-1.72.1 release (just few minutes ago was committed another bug fix into the extensions/ subdirectory) What we should do as soon is possible is to update the sources to DocBook-XML-4.5 DTD, but that depend on having the package installed at least on quantum, and anduin. Bruce, some timeline about that? Also BLFS should close #2241 to allow editors to install the new DTD on their hosts. Randy has assigned that ticket to himself. I can update quantum and anduin anytime, but I haven't looked at the procedure to do that. However, I can't imagine it being much different from what we have now. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: RFC: Create a new-rendering-tools branch
El Sábado, 24 de Febrero de 2007 17:14, Bruce Dubbs escribió: Randy has assigned that ticket to himself. I can update quantum and anduin anytime, but I haven't looked at the procedure to do that. However, I can't imagine it being much different from what we have now. On that ticket there is patch by Matthew with the commands update. -- 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: Testing required: SVN build segfaults on stripping chapter6
M.Canales.es wrote: OK, thanks for the explanation. I understand what was happening now. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: RFC: Create a new-rendering-tools branch
On 2/24/07, Bruce Dubbs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: M.Canales.es wrote: Also BLFS should close #2241 to allow editors to install the new DTD on their hosts. Randy has assigned that ticket to himself. I can update quantum and anduin anytime, but I haven't looked at the procedure to do that. However, I can't imagine it being much different from what we have now. I raised the priority of the ticket, so hopefully that will prod Randy into action. Matthew has already attached a book diff. http://wiki.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/attachment/ticket/2241/docbook-4.5.diff -- Dan -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
IRCD logs
I was wondering if the IRC logs are available online. It doesn't look like it to me, at least not at the old location: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~ircd/ But that makes sense since ircd is not in a home directory anymore on quantum, but in /srv/ircd. I don't know if any extra setup is needed in ircd or httpd.conf, but at least /srv/ircd has too restrictive permissions for this to happen. I CC'd Joe since I'm pretty sure he has some experience here and may have set up the old logging system. -- Dan -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: IRCD logs
Dan Nicholson wrote: I was wondering if the IRC logs are available online. It doesn't look like it to me, at least not at the old location: No, they aren't currently publicly available. Although, they could be made so if enough people deemed it necessary or desirable. -- JH -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Confusing Linux headers?
On Saturday 24 February 2007 17:11, Jeremy Huntwork wrote: The use of the name 'Linux-Headers-2.6.20' seems to imply that it is a separate package, very similar to the rest of the book. If we changed the title to something like 'Linux-2.6.20 Sanitized Headers' or something similar, it might make the point a little clearer at first glance. See Manuel's commits r7942 and r7943. The titles now read Linux 2.6.20.1 API Headers. Matt. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Confusing Linux headers?
One of the CLFS developers wrote on lfs-dev that some users on IRC were confused about whether the Linux headers were the CLFS headers or not. http://linuxfromscratch.org/pipermail/lfs-dev/2007-February/058935.html The LFS editors are having a hard time seeing this perspective since we're all aware of the history there. So, I'd like to ask if anyone has been confused about this relationship. If so, could you suggest some text that would clarify it? The pages are here: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/development/chapter05/linux-headers.html http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/development/chapter06/linux-headers.html Thanks. -- Dan -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: IRCD logs
On 2/24/07, Jeremy Huntwork [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dan Nicholson wrote: I was wondering if the IRC logs are available online. It doesn't look like it to me, at least not at the old location: No, they aren't currently publicly available. Although, they could be made so if enough people deemed it necessary or desirable. Well, I deem it desirable :) I'm not big on using IRC, but I realize that a lot happens there, so I like to skim the logs from time to time and see if there was anything important I missed. Anyone else? -- Dan -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: IRCD logs
Dan Nicholson wrote: I was wondering if the IRC logs are available online. It doesn't look like it to me, at least not at the old location: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~ircd/ But that makes sense since ircd is not in a home directory anymore on quantum, but in /srv/ircd. I don't know if any extra setup is needed in ircd or httpd.conf, but at least /srv/ircd has too restrictive permissions for this to happen. I CC'd Joe since I'm pretty sure he has some experience here and may have set up the old logging system. I believe it was Archaic that setup the old logging system. There was a bot that idled in each channel. This would be easy enough to do again. I'm not a fan of having public logs though. Many people idle 24/7 and have their client log, and I suggest that for anyone interested in finding out what's going on. Otherwise, if it's a log or die situation, I suppose I can set something up, but I would really like to keep them in a place where only people with a shell account on quantum can get to them. -- 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
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 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
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 21:34, 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
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
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 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
