Re: Final prep for 6.3
Nathan Coulson wrote: > On 8/10/07, Dan Nicholson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> On 8/10/07, Nathan Coulson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> Do hope to come back to it someday though, Who is in charge of the >>> bootscripts these days? >>> >> I think DJ officially, but I've been doing most of the maintenance for >> a while. I'd love to see you involved again Nathan, there's quite a >> few things I'd like to address about the bootscripts. Most people >> don't seem that interested in peering into the ugly corners of >> init.d/functions, though :) >> >> I think for LFS-7.0, we should consider the LSB style scripts that DJ >> has in contrib/lsb-v3. There's a couple patches floating around on >> lfs-dev, too, even if we don't go full bore LSB style. Not much has >> changed, but I think all the *proc functions could have a thorough >> cleaning. Some things in there are either suboptimal or just wrong >> (mostly with handling of pid files). >> >> -- >> Dan >> -- >> > > thanks dan, coming back from holidays in a coupple of weeks, maybe > (if DJ doesn't mind, and work doesn't keep me away again), I'll see if > I can get back in action. > > I haven't touched the bootscripts since I thought you were back last time. Didn't know I was 'responsible' for them still. I have had barely more time than you. Hell LSB-V3 sat on my dev box for months before I finally got them cleaned up. I still need to get the last change to checkfs in there before the 6.3 tarball is rolled too. -- DJ Lucas -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Final prep for 6.3
On 8/10/07, Dan Nicholson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 8/10/07, Nathan Coulson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Do hope to come back to it someday though, Who is in charge of the > > bootscripts these days? > > I think DJ officially, but I've been doing most of the maintenance for > a while. I'd love to see you involved again Nathan, there's quite a > few things I'd like to address about the bootscripts. Most people > don't seem that interested in peering into the ugly corners of > init.d/functions, though :) > > I think for LFS-7.0, we should consider the LSB style scripts that DJ > has in contrib/lsb-v3. There's a couple patches floating around on > lfs-dev, too, even if we don't go full bore LSB style. Not much has > changed, but I think all the *proc functions could have a thorough > cleaning. Some things in there are either suboptimal or just wrong > (mostly with handling of pid files). > > -- > Dan > -- thanks dan, coming back from holidays in a coupple of weeks, maybe (if DJ doesn't mind, and work doesn't keep me away again), I'll see if I can get back in action. -- Nathan Coulson (conathan) -- nathan at linuxfromscratch org conathan at gmail com -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Final prep for 6.3
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: RIPEMD160 Dan Nicholson wrote: > On 8/11/07, Bryan Kadzban <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> I should also note that the boot scripts are useless the way they >> are, unless you have an initramfs. > > You mean in the case that you're using LVM or something else > devmapper backed? Or always unless you're using initramfs? When I > started using an initramfs, I had to change the udev script to check > whether /dev was mounted already and if the static devices already > existed, but that was it. But I can't see any issues going the other > way for a regular partition as root. The scripts I wrote were only to recreate the devmapper and md devices in the /dev tmpfs after udev finishes; they're not needed unless your root is devmapper or md. They also won't work unless you use an initramfs, because they assume the devices have all been activated (from the initramfs), just their nodes are missing. If your root is devmapper or md, then you need to set up the devmapper or md devices in the initramfs, and those nodes don't get moved to the host (at least, not in my initramfs). So the boot script for dmraid runs "dmsetup mknodes" (dmsetup is part of the device-mapper library) to recreate its devices, just before checkfs. The LVM2 script runs a similar LVM2 program (vgmknodes). md-raid runs a loop over each /dev/md[0-9]* device and manually creates the nodes. Anyway, this setup can use the existing LFS udev script as-is, since I don't move the initramfs /dev. I just need a couple additions to udev depending on which features were used for the root FS, so that checkfs can work. Those additions are what I wrote. :-) There's another kind of setup that would require different scripts, though (LVM2 for /usr, and / on a normal partition, for instance). Since root is on a normal partition, you wouldn't need an initramfs, but you'd still need to bring up the LVM2 volumes. So you'd run the real "vgchange -ay" instead of my script's "vgmknodes". It may be easier to say "anyone using LVM2 anywhere should use the initramfs"; that way the script doesn't have to worry about detecting which type of setup the user has. The initramfs will build all the LVM2 volumes the way it's written now, and the script will recreate the devices after udev runs. Of course, mounting a tmpfs on /dev in the initramfs and moving it to the host would be another way to handle this; then the scripts I wrote are completely pointless. ;-) I didn't want to do that because it'd require changes to the udev script, and at the time, I figured that it could wait until after a bootscript release matching the 6.3 book was made. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFGvlTDS5vET1Wea5wRA46qAKDXDj3E0titMwLC3OGub40Z6ttkQACgt12T w6s5+4+Y3VbNNsk8wEocggI= =iSm2 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Final prep for 6.3
On 8/11/07, Bryan Kadzban <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: RIPEMD160 > > Dan Nicholson wrote: > > Excellent. How do you feel about working on some patches for the BLFS > > book so that we can actually build the userspace components for these > > things? I have no experience in the device-mapper area. > > Neither did I until a few weeks ago, when I started testing this > stuff... ;-) I should also note that the boot scripts are useless the > way they are, unless you have an initramfs. You mean in the case that you're using LVM or something else devmapper backed? Or always unless you're using initramfs? When I started using an initramfs, I had to change the udev script to check whether /dev was mounted already and if the static devices already existed, but that was it. But I can't see any issues going the other way for a regular partition as root. -- Dan -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Final prep for 6.3
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: RIPEMD160 Dan Nicholson wrote: > Excellent. How do you feel about working on some patches for the BLFS > book so that we can actually build the userspace components for these > things? I have no experience in the device-mapper area. Neither did I until a few weeks ago, when I started testing this stuff... ;-) I should also note that the boot scripts are useless the way they are, unless you have an initramfs. The initramfs should probably be added to BLFS also (preferably with a pointer to it in LFS chapter 8, with an "if you need this" prefix, but I'm getting way ahead of myself here). Anyway: I can generate some patches, sure; I'll just have to look up the various package build scripts to see how I set them up, and then get going. I'm guessing it'd be good to avoid applying them until the 6.3 stuff is out, right? If so, then no huge hurry. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFGviOLS5vET1Wea5wRA1TgAKDZT+Vs51xvpPb2mnZNf7nJ5o6nTQCgyCQ6 yJl6WCYC2KlYS4qn0mFqpnE= =ajFy -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Final prep for 6.3
On 8/10/07, Bryan Kadzban <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Dan Nicholson wrote: > > I think for LFS-7.0, we should consider the LSB style scripts that DJ > > has in contrib/lsb-v3. There's a couple patches floating around on > > lfs-dev, too, even if we don't go full bore LSB style. > > And I've got a few new scripts hanging around here (basically, they're > along the same lines as the udev script: they're needed to get the root > FS's device up), too. They're supposed to be used with the initramfs > package that I'm supposed to be working on. ;-) > > (They're scripts for getting stuff like md-raid, LVM, and devmapper > devices created before checkfs/mountfs run.) Excellent. How do you feel about working on some patches for the BLFS book so that we can actually build the userspace components for these things? I have no experience in the device-mapper area. -- Dan -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Final prep for 6.3
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: RIPEMD160 Dan Nicholson wrote: > I think for LFS-7.0, we should consider the LSB style scripts that DJ > has in contrib/lsb-v3. There's a couple patches floating around on > lfs-dev, too, even if we don't go full bore LSB style. And I've got a few new scripts hanging around here (basically, they're along the same lines as the udev script: they're needed to get the root FS's device up), too. They're supposed to be used with the initramfs package that I'm supposed to be working on. ;-) (They're scripts for getting stuff like md-raid, LVM, and devmapper devices created before checkfs/mountfs run.) -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFGvShYS5vET1Wea5wRAxrMAJ4idCjkKjrKnNsqauJu6ujjuIZs7gCfZ44t lXCmcsRetuqJKCpDwVRWiZ0= =58Pm -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Final prep for 6.3
On 8/10/07, Nathan Coulson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Do hope to come back to it someday though, Who is in charge of the > bootscripts these days? I think DJ officially, but I've been doing most of the maintenance for a while. I'd love to see you involved again Nathan, there's quite a few things I'd like to address about the bootscripts. Most people don't seem that interested in peering into the ugly corners of init.d/functions, though :) I think for LFS-7.0, we should consider the LSB style scripts that DJ has in contrib/lsb-v3. There's a couple patches floating around on lfs-dev, too, even if we don't go full bore LSB style. Not much has changed, but I think all the *proc functions could have a thorough cleaning. Some things in there are either suboptimal or just wrong (mostly with handling of pid files). -- Dan -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Final prep for 6.3
On 8/8/07, Bruce Dubbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Dan Nicholson wrote: > > Bruce, > > > > I've taken care of all the outstanding issues I could find. I think > > we're ready for 6.3-rc2 or 6.3, whichever seems better. Only one thing > > remains that I'd like to see fixed: > > > > http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/development/appendices/acknowledgements.html > > > > Some of that information is not entirely accurate or just plain wrong > > now. At the very least, I'd like to see myself, Bryan and Alexander > > added since we've directly committed to LFS over the past couple years > > (hopefully I'm not forgetting anyone else). But I don't even know what > > I'd put or whether I should try to resolve the inaccuracies. > > Yes, that page is a bit dated. I have no idea if the mirrors are still > accurate or not. I would want to add Randy as the BLFS Project Leader. > I think several should be moved to "Former Project Team Members": > > Name Last Post to LFS-devLast Entry in Changlog > > Archaic 08/14/06 May 15, 2006 > Nathan Coulson09/13/06 ??? > Anderson Lizardo 12/10/05 ??? > Ryan Oliver 02/06/06 April 6, 2005 > James Robertson 09/20/05 ??? > Tushar Teredesai 01/29/07 ??? > > Comments? > Well, I've been inactive since at least the end of the summer of 2006, (Never officially said I left, but never found time to review the bootscripts between now and then). Do hope to come back to it someday though, Who is in charge of the bootscripts these days? -- Nathan Coulson (conathan) -- nathan at linuxfromscratch org conathan at gmail com -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Final prep for 6.3
Bruce Dubbs wrote: > Yes, that page is a bit dated. I have no idea if the mirrors are still > accurate or not. The credits page on the website: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/credits.html Are all current mirrors for the lfs projects. I haven't gone through and checked for dead mirrors in a bit, but the mirrors list and the credits list match so it is about as good as we are going to get if you want to use that as a base. Justin -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Final prep for 6.3
Dan Nicholson wrote: > Bruce, > > I've taken care of all the outstanding issues I could find. I think > we're ready for 6.3-rc2 or 6.3, whichever seems better. Only one thing > remains that I'd like to see fixed: > > http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/development/appendices/acknowledgements.html > > Some of that information is not entirely accurate or just plain wrong > now. At the very least, I'd like to see myself, Bryan and Alexander > added since we've directly committed to LFS over the past couple years > (hopefully I'm not forgetting anyone else). But I don't even know what > I'd put or whether I should try to resolve the inaccuracies. Yes, that page is a bit dated. I have no idea if the mirrors are still accurate or not. I would want to add Randy as the BLFS Project Leader. I think several should be moved to "Former Project Team Members": Name Last Post to LFS-devLast Entry in Changlog Archaic 08/14/06 May 15, 2006 Nathan Coulson09/13/06 ??? Anderson Lizardo 12/10/05 ??? Ryan Oliver 02/06/06 April 6, 2005 James Robertson 09/20/05 ??? Tushar Teredesai 01/29/07 ??? Comments? -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Final prep for 6.3
Bruce, I've taken care of all the outstanding issues I could find. I think we're ready for 6.3-rc2 or 6.3, whichever seems better. Only one thing remains that I'd like to see fixed: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/development/appendices/acknowledgements.html Some of that information is not entirely accurate or just plain wrong now. At the very least, I'd like to see myself, Bryan and Alexander added since we've directly committed to LFS over the past couple years (hopefully I'm not forgetting anyone else). But I don't even know what I'd put or whether I should try to resolve the inaccuracies. -- Dan -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
