Re: [lfs-support] LFS Dev Release Schedules
> Last year, there were changes on about 108 days. Basically, > whenever something needed fixing, and when a ticket in trac [ > mostly, package upgrades ] appeared to be ready to action. > > I'm not sure about the current situation with trac, but once the Trac and SVN are still on the old server and accessible as per usual. Trac and SVN have been tested on the new server and seem to be working fine (just need some data storage upgrades due to version differences). The cut-over won't take long and only requires a DNS change to become visible. TTL is set to 15 minutes so when it happens it'll be quick. Gerard -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.0 release, Building on Debian 5 host build system...
On 29/11/2011 11:21, David Scott Williams wrote: > BTW-- now that I have done what the book told me to do, > CC="gcc" /usr/bin/perl scripts/test-installation.pl > /sources/glibc-build/ > Your new glibc installation seems to be ok. > make[1]: Leaving directory `/sources/glibc-2.14.1' > root:/sources/glibc-build# > > :) > Joy. Awesome, glad you got it working. In the end no harm done and tons learned, which is exactly what we aim to provide with the LFS project. In the end all these seemingly frustrating issues just helped you accomplish the larger goal. And it helps validate that the book's instructions remain valid and correct which is always a good peer-review in a way. Gerard -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.0 release, Building on Debian 5 host build system...
On 29/11/2011 11:04, Bruce Dubbs wrote: > David Scott Williams wrote: >> Here is the section I did not do. I did not realize that it was >> mandatory (I thought it was cosmetic ;)) > Building an OS is complicated. Don't assume. There are a couple of > places where we say an item is optional, but not many. > > The most general recommendation for the first few times is do things > *exactly* as specified in the book. In David's defense I can understand his point too. If all the book says is "to remove the I have no name! prompt" then I can see where that sounds like it's not all that significant. In our defense, passwd and group files are core/essential Linux files that no *NIX system lives without so we also make our assumptions that certain things are just understood by Linux users. It's definitely a bit of a grey area. Cleaning up the text a bit would not necessarily be a bad thing either (not to be confused with excessive hand-holding but have it be more correct as there are additional reasons beyond that I have no name prompt although that's probably the most visible of reasons). Gerard -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.0 release, Building on Debian 5 host build system...
Hi David, On 29/11/2011 10:13, David Scott Williams wrote: > I feel silly replying to myself again -- but...after re-running the > check, and it coming up OK... I went ahead and went to install this > glibc... the tail end of the error message (I assume this is relating to > a manual//info?) is as follows. Not sure if this is OK/normal/whatever. > > make[2]: Entering directory `/sources/glibc-2.14.1/manual' > pwd=`pwd`; \ > no libm-err-tab.pl $pwd/..> libm-err-tmp > /bin/sh: line 1: no: command not found > make[2]: *** [stamp-libm-err] Error 127 > make[2]: Leaving directory `/sources/glibc-2.14.1/manual' > make[1]: *** [manual/subdir_install] Error 2 > make[1]: Leaving directory `/sources/glibc-2.14.1' > make: *** [install] Error 2 > I have no name!:/sources/glibc-build# I just checked through the section of Glibc source code and I believe glibc-2.14.1/manual/Makefile line 110 is where it goes wrong for you. The line in question contains: $(PERL) $< $$pwd/.. > libm-err-tmp The $(PERL) variable seems to have expanded into "no" which likely will be traced back during an error encountered during the "configure" script where it tried to detect perl and failed. There is a second issue: notice the last line in your output: I have no name!:/sources/glibc-build# "I have no name!" is significant here. This is caused by the system not knowing "who" you are - usually because of a missing /etc/passwd file. This step is handled in Section 6.6 of the book "Creating Essential Files and Symlinks". If this step was missed, perhaps you missed a couple of other steps in the same beginnings of Chapter 6 that led to Glibc's failure. Some of those core system files will definitely trip up a configure script. The files are simply assumed to always exist without exception and error checking for their absence often doesn't exist or is poorly done. If in doubt, perhaps start Chapter 6 from the beginning again assuming Chapter 5 was done correctly. Gerard -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: LFS-6.6, Stage2, glibc, nscd.c:442
Quoth the creator: > Gerard: Read the book we wrote for our users. But, don’t be afraid to > deviate from it. After all, that’s the whole point of the project: to > make a system for yourself, not according to somebody else’s > specifications. > http://www.crazyengineers.com/gerard-beekmans-building-linux-from-scratch/ > As true as that is, of course, it is sometimes terribly difficult to support individual users who are doing their own thing (straying from the standard path is unfortunately not always for the faint of heart). Others have said it: unless we can duplicate the problem somebody faces doing things slightly different, support can be hard to provide. Of course we all love a challenge and with time and patience we often do get to the bottom of things and offer workarounds or book rewrites to cope with it. Ciao, Gerard -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Unable to boot LFS 6.4
Jaiyson, > [ 2.417123] VFS: Cannot open root device "hda2" or unknown-block(2,0) > [ 2.417224] Please append a correct "root=" boot option; here are the > available partitions: > [ 2.417360] Kernel panic - not syncing: VFS: Unable to mount root fs > on unknown-block(2,0) The first thing I would check into is make sure your kernel is compiled with the correct drivers for your chipset. Seeing the reference to 'hda(2)' you'll need to make sure you have the correct IDE drivers compiled into the kernel. Make sure you have the correct chipset chosen (Intel, VIA, etc). Also ensure while you're at it that you have the correct filesystem drivers selected. Seeing you use ext3, that shouldn't be a problem, but you might as well double-check. Gerard -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: use of LFS_TGT in relesed lfs 6.4 book
> How it happened is up to him to explain. Perhaps he didn't > make a tag for the release, and just used trunk after the > fact when making the PDF file. > > Seems there should be a checklist for making a release, I > know I have one for BLFS when I make a release. There is (a checklist). I'm sure it'll turn out to be an honest mistake, so it's not a big deal. Of all the ones to make, this one is fixable, so no harm done. I'll let Bruce look into it as he likely knows most about it at this point and will be able to fix it. It'll be resolved by tomorrow one way or another. Gerard -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: use of LFS_TGT in relesed lfs 6.4 book
> Yeah, verified. It's there in the PDF file. That's really odd. I don't > know who generated the PDF, but it's definitely contaminated with stuff > from trunk which were post 6.4. That qualifies as an oops if I ever heard of one. Refresh my memory, who did the actual release tagging again for 6.4. Should be a simple matter of checking out that version of SVN and regen the PDF. Otherwise, pull the PDF offline for now until it can be dealt with. G -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: SATA PC Fails to Boot PATA Linux Drive
> Case closed. Glad to hear you got it resolved. Yes we're always interested in knowing what exactly did it if you are able to narrow it down some day. Take care, Gerard -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: SATA PC Fails to Boot PATA Linux Drive
Alex, > Just a thought (while we're at it): how come a lousy 2.4.2 rescue floppy can > get to my IDE drives (read/write) without my using any special HDD driver > machinations? This may not be *the* answer to your problem, but just some notes to consider for future reference. Every kernel's default configuration enables a certain number of drivers to be built-in and a number to be modules. This set of enabled drivers is not always the same from kernel to kernel. It's therefore possible that your 2.4.2 kernel had different defaults than the one you are currently using. Meaning you need to reconfigure your current kernel to include the necessary IDE and SCSI drivers to match your hardware. And if they are already selected, make sure they are not modules. While your kernel is booting up, pay close attention to its output. If your harddrive controller is recognized by a built-in driver, you'll see this on the output. When a physical disk is recognized, it will print out a line with the partitions it found (it'll print lines like hda1 hda2 hda3 or the sd variety). If you don't see anything matching your current harddrive configuration you can be fairly sure the kernel you compiled does not have the drivers necessary built-in. Just a reminder also - when you compiled a new kernel, don't forget to copy the actual kernel images to the /boot directory. Many people often reconfigure and recompile the kernel and then don't actually install it by copying the image. So you keep rebooting your *old* kernel expecting different results. Gerard -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: could not chroot to new evironment
Hi, A few replies have already been sent that mentioned a few different aspect of what went wrong in your build. I just saw your own replies that you got it figured out. Here are a few additional notes which may prove helpful for the archives. > chroot: cannot run command `/home/morfast/lfs/lfs_test/tools/bin/env': > No such file or directory > > ($LFS is /home/morfast/lfs/lfs_test/ , I build it in my home directory > for test) > > it seems the tools chain is broken, but the result of the test : readelf > -l a.out seems correct,just like: > > [Requesting program interpreter: > /home/morfast/lfs/lfs_test/tools/lib/ld-linux.so.2] The interpreter is requested to be /home/morfast/lfs/lfs_test/tools/lib/ld-linux.so.2 - while this file may exist outside the chroot environment, it does not exist inside chroot. Inside chroot it is /tools rather than /home/morfast/... The chroot command first changes the root directory from / to whatever is specified (/home/morfast/lfs/lfs_test in your case) - then it tries to run whatever you ask it to. So any errors chroot returns are relative to inside chroot environment, not outside it. What it was really trying to find was /home/morfast/lfs/lfs_test/home/morfast/lfs/lfs_test/tools/lib/ld-linux.so.2 Gerard -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Question regarding legalities
Gregory, There is absolutely no problem with printing the book. The license of the book only requires you to retain the original copyright notice as per the link Marius already shared. - http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/stable/legalnotice.html That comes more into play when you redistribute the book. When you just print it off so you have a hard copy of it as you're working through the book, there's no issue whatsoever. Gerard -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: lfs-support Digest, Vol 1142, Issue 1
Settings are correct, but it seems the cronjob that is responsible for triggering the send of a daily digest isn't activated. Currently when a digest reaches a max size it'll be sent by Mailman itself when it processes a next incoming message. Bruce, if you check the mailman section in root's fcrontab you'll them commented out. I don't recall having installed a fcrontab file for the mailman user but I can't check right now. Can you just turn on the digest crontab for the time being? There are other cron entries for mailman that may or may not work as-is. I haven't verified them to work post-migration yet. Gerard -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Mailman has gone wonky
Archaic wrote: Please be careful before you reply to an email. Check the date. Mailman appears to be dumping some really old mail into the stream (like 2004 email). Upon further examination this appears to have been my fault. I did something wrong during a Mailman maintenance task. -- Gerard Beekmans /* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Hi! A few questions from a first timer
Dan Nicholson wrote: 6.1.1 almost stable book at http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/testing/. You can also download the Testing book. The link wasn't available on the Download page yesterday but that was corrected. http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/downloads/testing/ That should do it. -- Gerard Beekmans /* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Hi! A few questions from a first timer
To answer #1 and #2: The book is always authoritative. If the lfs-packages tarballs includes extra files that are not mentioned in the book you are reading, ignore it. If the book mentions files the tarball doesn't have, download them (there are URLs in chapter 3 of the book but I think you already figured that out). lfs-packages tarballs can be out of sync with the book due to human error. You said you had lfs-packages-6.1.1 and book version 6.1. 6.1.1 hasn't been released yet, it's currently in "pre-release" state. The current testing, for example, has a newer binutils patch than the one from your lfs-packages-6.1.1.tar.bz2 file. Unless it was a typo on your part and you meant to type 2.15.94.0.2.2-gcc4-1 and not 2.15.90.0.2.2-gcc4-1 like you did. Also, you mentioned util-linux patch version 2.12g but the version is actually 2.12q. Maybe a typo, since 'q' and 'g' can look similar. Either way, you have a mis-matched book and packages version. I would encourage to get the current Testing version of LFS. #3 Each time I start up the host computer (Suse 9.3 Pro), I have to mount the lfs partition. I am guessing this is because we have not messed with /etc/fstab yet, and I have to reset the environment variable export LFS=/mnt/lfs. Is this expected behavior at this point (I am up to page 49 "Chapter 5 Constructing a Temporary System Yes, that is expected and normal under the circumstances. You could modify your host system's /etc/fstasb so the LFS partition is mounted automatically if you wanted to. #4 Is there anything else that I need to do before working on LFS each time I boot the host system? If you are still in chapter 5, make sure you switch to the "lfs" user as explained in chapter 4 before continuing with package installations from chapter 5. -- Gerard Beekmans /* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
lfs-book renders once a day from now on
Hi guys, Just a FYI. The script that renders the lfs-book used to get rendered twice a day, at 4 AM and 4 PM. I removed the 4 PM job and just have it update once a day from now on. This'll help with the server load during the day when too many other things are going on. Server replacement is being worked on. Justin Knierim and I have been talking and figuring out the best way to go about it. Details will be forthcoming soon -- Gerard Beekmans /* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Anybody getting ssh bruce force attacks?
Rats. Wrong list, meant to send to lfs-security, not -support. Can't even claim a typo on this one. Thinko? -- Gerard Beekmans /* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Anybody getting ssh bruce force attacks?
Hey guys, Just wondering who else has been getting these. I have a /24 IP space that seems to be targeted lately for sshd bruce force attacks. I can't seem to keep up with firewalling the bad guys out. Luckily there's no such thing as weak passwords on the servers I have access to, so all should be well. For now anyway. It's just annoying. Yeah I could block all access to port 22 and only allow a select few IP addresses access but this makes things cumbersome when I try to login to my machine when I'm out of town. The only maybe way around this is create a web app where I can input IP addresses that can SSH and some cronjob to check for changes and update the firewall accordingly. Does anybody have other ideas? I'd like to keep ssh open for convenience reasons. It'd really suck if I block the world, am out of town, get an emergency call for work, and "oops I can't login until I'm home again which will be in a few days. Sorry boss, you'll just have to live with the downed service until then." That's not going to go over very well. -- Gerard Beekmans /* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: A Hotplug question
Ron Keller wrote: Following this message, the cursor stays locked in one position on the screen and I do not get a screen prompt unless I hit the return key. Is there some way to get around this problem? Thanks in advance for your help. Nothing is actually locked, the kernel just printed a message to your screen. You can change this using the "dmesg" command. The '-n' option changes the level at which kernel logs are sent to the console. I'm not sure which level you would need to set to prevent these USB messages from appearing. You would have to experiment with it. If you set the level to '1' (dmesg -n 1), the console will receive no messages except kernel panic messages. All messages, including the ones that aren't printed, still go to the system log daemon as usual. -- Gerard Beekmans /* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: gcc fails tests (lots) in LFS 6.1 Ch. 6
Matt Bartley wrote: I've tried booting my host system with kernel linux-2.6.11.12 and building LFS up through chapter 6 gcc, but not yet installing gcc. The tests appear normal. Then I rebooted my host system into linux-2.6.12, chrooted back into the LFS tree, and then re-ran the gcc test suite (with the same previously compiled binaries). Then the test failures happen. Test failures with the 2.6.12 kernel tree was brought up and explained the other day by Greg Schafer on the lfs-dev list. Here's a copy of said email for easy reference: - Hi I haven't seen this mentioned on the LFS lists so I'm bringing it up here for your info.. LFS is certainly affected. 2.6.12 kernel introduced a new feature called "address space randomization" and it's switched on by default. AFAICT, this is the same thing that Red Hat calls "exec-shield-randomize". The precompiled header support in GCC-3.4.4 (PCH) does not cope with the new kernel feature which is reflected in the GCC testsuite as new failures. It will potentially bite in the real world for example if trying to compile Qt (with PCH enabled) under a 2.6.12 kernel. One workaround is to switch off the new kernel feature :-( But there exists a patch that has been backported from the 4.0 branch which is likely to be applied for 3.4.5: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2005-07/msg01389.html If you study that patch, you'll see that it goes grovelling thru' /proc looking for "/proc/sys/kernel/exec-shield-randomize". Unfortunately, that is a RedHatism.. the name of that sysctl in vanilla 2.6.12 reads "/proc/sys/kernel/randomize_va_space". Therefore I suspect the situation may still be imperfect even after the patch goes into 3.4.5. I'll pester upstream in due course after I've done some testing. But maybe not because 4.0.x appears to be OK. You can find more information about this issue here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2005-07/msg00851.html http://www.diy-linux.org/pipermail/diy-linux-dev/2005-July/000592.html This Community Service Announcement(TM) was brought to you by... Regards Greg -- Gerard Beekmans /* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: GCC4 ch. 6: compiler produces unrunnable binaries
Matt Bartley wrote: I've copied the binary from Debian, which isn't statically linked, but it works anyway. Please install a statically linked version inside chroot. If it's a dynamically linked binary it'll have to use your LFS' Glibc libraries. If there is an issue with your Glibc installation, which looks like it might be the case, strace may not function right. strace: exec: No such file or directory. That's a typical indication from strace that there is something wrong with the Glibc installation. The gcc4 branch. Version GCC4-20050721 to be more precise. Unfortunately I haven't done much of anything with that GCC version. I can throw out some wild guesses like how GCC4 and Glibc might need to be build differently from what the current LFS books says, but I really couldn't answer it. If there is a known issue with how GCC4 compiles Glibc (or how the current instructions in LFS might be buggy for this application and miscompile Glibc) you should be able to find it in the mailinglist archives. -- Gerard Beekmans /* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: GCC4 ch. 6: compiler produces unrunnable binaries
Matt Bartley wrote: Are you able to run "ldd" on a.out? If so, any missing libraries? Though usually you would see a missing library in ldd's output unless it's ld-linux.so.2 itself. If ldd doesn't give you a clue, I suggest downloading the 'strace' program from http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=2861 Compile and link it statically, copy it inside chroot and run a.out this way: strace -o output.txt ./a.out Take a look at the output.txt file. It will be filled with system calls which may or may not mean anything to you. Sift through it and look for "No such file or directory" errors. Some will be expected as it tries to locate libraries in a few locations so keep that in mind. Every library it tries to find should be found at any rate. If it doesn't, that's where your problem would be. Permission denied errors are also something to look for. Feel free to email the output.txt file to this list if you can't make sense of it. Also, this problem doesn't happen if I build LFS-6.1 or LFS-development. What exactly are you trying to build then? Did I miss that part? OT: I read these groups through the NNTP interface, but it won't let me post that way any more. Following these threads is a pain. Unfortunately the NNTP system isn't the greatest thing out there. It's not actively maintained anymore because nobody has a clue how the thing works. I'm contemplating getting rid of it altogether if something can't be figured out soon. That's a discussion for another thread. -- Gerard Beekmans /* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: internet connection with liveccd
steve crosby wrote: Yes, but given the frequency of the issue with recent FC releases, it may be better to *always* apply the workaround, regardless of the host - which will eliminate the problem completely. We can then add other workarounds as required. At least, that's what I think Gerard meant. That's not quite what i meant. I as just blind and completely missed the Note box for some reason. Always applying that workaround isn't something I would suggest myself. It's a workaround in the end, not an issue everybody deals with. I would consider it a little sloppy to default to that method instead of giving the user a real choice in the matter. Of course when I say that I'm not taking into account ease of use vs. ease of our support network. That is definitely a valid point to take into account. If somebody would like to take that point and run away with it, please. From an education standpoint, it gives the reader exposure to the c;m;mi model eary (before they start building LFS), although we already expect that level of knowledge from an LFS reader. Yes I tend to agree if they don't know about that by the time they start with the LFS book, there's a bigger problem. -- Gerard Beekmans /* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: internet connection with liveccd
Matthew Burgess wrote: Err, I thought this particular issue was already covered adequately by the "Note" box at http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/6.1/chapter02/creatingfilesystem.html. My apologies. I even checked the SVN version of the book before I wrote that email yesterday to make sure it was there as I thought it was. I checked that page and I didn't see the "Note" box. It is kind of big and obvious but somehow I overlooked it. Consider it my "duh" moment. -- Gerard Beekmans /* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: internet connection with liveccd
steve crosby wrote: Another option is to apply the FC2\3 workaround permanently - change the book instructions to download, compile and use e2fsprogs from LFS to create the LFS partition always, and never use the host tools. Although that would work for all e2fs problems, I can forsee other FC related tool issues, so might not be as useful as it could be. However, at least it would be documented. That's more than we can say right now. It might miss other issues and those should simply be added as they are discovered. Yet Another Option: Have a "Host Quirks" page - document known Host based issues and suggested workarounds - we could maintain that as an online only page If such a page is created, it might as well be part of the book itself. This kind of information would be good to have available right away since you might be off-line while building. Granted, chances of somebody being off-line while building from a regular distribution are slim in this day and age, but not impossible. -- Gerard Beekmans /* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: GCC4 ch. 6: compiler produces unrunnable binaries
On July 23, 2005 07:32 pm, Matt Bartley wrote: > [Requesting program interpreter: /lib/ld-linux-so.2] That looks fine. Let's track it down from there. /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (inside chroot, so make sure when you check this out you're looking in the right directory) is a symlink to the read dynamic linker. If you're using the latest LFS book that would be /lib/ld-2.3.5.so When you try to run the a.out program, it will try to laod /lib/ld-linux.so.2. If this symlink isn't set correctly, it's going to fail with a "No such file or directory" error. It's refering to the ld-linux.so.2 file, not a.out although the error itself doesn't hint to it. It's a bit confusing. Does your symlink exist and does it point to something valid (run ls -l /lib/ld-linux.so.2 to verify)? You should be able to run it just like any other program. When you execute /lib/ld-linux.so.2, what happens? -- Gerard Beekmans /* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: GCC4 ch. 6: compiler produces unrunnable binaries
On July 23, 2005 08:07 pm, David Jensen wrote: > Is support for a.out binaries enabled in your kernel? > CONFIG_BINFMT_AOUT=m or y I think you're getting something mixed up here. It's a common area of confusion, so no worries. a.out is the linker (ld)'s default filename when you don't specify one (and ld is invoked by the compiler after it compiles the .c source code). It's a left-over from the times where a.out was the executable format, before "elf" was created. The binutils guys simply haven't changed the default filename yet and probably won't since it's one of those things that is the expected default. -- Gerard Beekmans /* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: internet connection with liveccd
On July 23, 2005 12:34 pm, Jeremy Huntwork wrote: > Hrm. Indeed. And I'm not sure about that one. I know there's been > reports before now concerning issues with FC4 and ext3, but I can't > remember the details. Are you thinking about the issue with extra attributes that e2fsprogs once upon a time couldn't process? If I am remembering the right issue (it's been a while), that issue has have been fixed in the current e2fsprogs version that we use with LFS now. -- Gerard Beekmans /* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Error Patching Bash-2.05b
That aside you're also using quite an old LFS version. You might want to move to LFS-6.0. Seeing you're only in chapter 5 you won't lose much time if you switch now. You will need to start from scratch if you switch. -- Gerard Beekmans /* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: 6.11. Glibc-2.3.4-20040701 'make check' seg faults
Unfortunately I can't help with this 64-bit system issue. > Also, given the nature of my build I was previously accustomed to > posting under lfs-hackers which has now been expired. I hope then, > that lfs-support is more appropriate than lfs-dev. Yes that's fine. If it becomes evident that it's something to do with the way the packages are installed for 64-bit systems we can move it to lfs-dev when appropriate. -- Gerard Beekmans /* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Kernel Panic!
On February 21, 2005 06:17 pm, Steven Pasternak wrote: > I tried both. I build the kernel w/ support for it, w/o support, and even > w/o module support and it keeps failing. It is a 2.6.9 kernel if that > matters. You could try a new kernel too of course to rule that out. Incidentally I had a similar problem with the 2.6.8.1 and 2.6.9 kernels last week. In my case it concerned a SCSI driver that wasn't working properly. Upgrading to 2.6.10 made it able to detect the partitions and mount them. When the kernel is loaded see if you can keep up with the scroll of text there. It may take a few reboots to figure it out all, since you can't always scroll up after a kernel panic so anything that scrolled away might be lost. When the IDE driver is loaded and it detects the harddrives, it will also show you the partitions that exist on it. Make sure it actually finds a harddrive. If it doesn't, you may have the wrong IDE driver after all. -- Gerard Beekmans /* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: glibc -2.3.4 (sect 6.11) make error
On February 21, 2005 04:10 pm, John Wildberger wrote: > I took your advice and re-installed Perl. > The make (sect 6.11) progressed now much further. However, it still stopped > with an error on this line: > > /sources/glibc-build/libc.so.6: undefined reference to `_Oumoddi3_internal' Did you restart the glibc build from scratch by removing the glibc-build directory and starting over again from the configure stage? -- Gerard Beekmans /* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: File System Issues during bootup
On February 21, 2005 08:43 pm, Steve Crosby wrote: > for example, to remove large_file and resize_inode from /dev/sdc1 > > echo "features -resize_inode" | debugfs -w -f- /dev/sdc1 > echo "features -large_file" | debugfs -w -f- /dev/sdc1 > e2fsck -p /dev/sdc1 Bad FC3, bad. Wow that's ugly. Rumor has it that e2fsprogs-1.36 may have these new features built in as well. Maybe not. I'll add your latest notes to the bugzilla bug and we'll have to do a more thorough investigation and consider our options. -- Gerard Beekmans /* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: File System Issues during bootup
On February 21, 2005 05:13 pm, Steve Crosby wrote: > Took less time than I thought. Thanks for the quick turnaround on that one. I've added it to Bugzilla. Will have to do some more testing to verify all this stuff and edit the text. But it's in bugzilla now, so it won't be forgotten. -- Gerard Beekmans /* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Status update with regards to the search engine: it works again
Hi guys, This message to lfs-dev/support and blfs-dev/support. People on the other lists will read this so not cross-posting more than necessary. As you all know, or may have suspected anyway, the search engine hasn't been updating lately. It worked in that it returned results, but it wasn't updated with regards to indexing the mailinglists and picking up new posts that way. Some time ago the engine started to exhibit behavior that when it was updating, the /var partition would fill up but no files were actually created. So I disabled the update script from cron for the time being so it wouldn't happen again (this filling up caused postfix and syslogd to crash). I upgraded the software today and did a test run. Everything seems to work again. It's only filling up where it is supposed to: in the search engine's directory and not in /var. While I was at it, I also added the two latest mailinglists to the search options: hlfs-book and livecd. If you notice anything strange, fire off an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thanks, -- Gerard Beekmans /* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: File System Issues during bootup
On February 21, 2005 04:38 pm, Steve Crosby wrote: > If I get some time today I'll scribble up a "fix" process for this issue - > it's not hard to do. That would be greatly appreciated too. It might even be preferable to put such a fix right into the LFS book. It's kind of a serious show stopper. -- Gerard Beekmans /* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Problems while Login to LFS
On February 21, 2005 04:11 pm, Phoe6 wrote: > I shouted Yo! when I booted up my first LFS :) It's a wondeful feeling, getting that first LFS working, isn't it? I'm glad we got all your problems sorted now for the time being. > Thank you so much of support, there's lot of valuable lessons I have > learned from you. That's the important part: as long as you learn from it. Now it only begins. -- Gerard Beekmans /* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Problems while Login to LFS
On February 21, 2005 03:22 pm, Phoe6 wrote: > I also want to inform this( if its related or not): while booting up > the lfs is prompting me to enter the run level > Enter Run Level: > I enter 3 and it proceeds and then comes this login problem. That's not normal. That hints towards your /etc/inittab file not being correct. I suggest removing /etc/inittab from LFS and re-creating it. The correct file is in chapter 6-Sysvinit. It might be a case that the agetty in inittab aren't correct either causing login problem. Recreating /etc/inittab properly may take care of both these issues. -- Gerard Beekmans /* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Problems while Login to LFS
On February 21, 2005 02:56 pm, Phoe6 wrote: > How should I be dealing with this? Boot back into Fedora Core 3, mount LFS an chroot into it. From within chroot, run: ldd /bin/login Make sure all the libraries exist. When you installed the Shadow package in Chapter 6, did you go through the configuration section? Did you enable shadow'ed passwords? Did you run "passwd root" to create a password for root? While you're in chroot, make sure /etc/passwd contains this line: root:x:0:0:root:/root:/bin/bash And check the /etc/shadow file too. It will look something like: root:$1$oNt8kY9/$sHh9Yl6vT6X.q1rF9pfP7.:12656:0:9:7::: Of course the encrypted password and the numbers will be different for you. Just make sure something is there and it looks good (the same amount of colon (:) characters and such). -- Gerard Beekmans /* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Kernel Panic!
On February 21, 2005 02:18 pm, Joel Miller wrote: > > Kernel Panic - not syncing: VFS: Unable to mount root fs on unknown block > > (3,69) > > Two guesses: > 1) Udev is not starting up properly when your system boots and This error happens before the root filesystem is even mounted. It means the kernel doesn't know how to access the specified device which usually indicates a missing driver in the kernel, the wrong driver, or compiled as a module rather than static. > 2) You are using serial ata harddrives and don't know that newer > versions of the kernel give Serial ATA devices SCSI device nodes (i.e. > /dev/sda5). I know this caught me when I first set up LFS. That's good to keep in mind. I didn't know that either. -- Gerard Beekmans /* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: File System Issues during bootup
On February 21, 2005 12:53 pm, Phoe6 wrote: > I guess the lfs online should be updated to use e2fsprogs out, version > 1.36 instead of 1.35 if people are using Fedora Core 3 as the host > system. The Development version of LFS already uses e2fsprogs-1.36 (http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/development/) Fedora Core 3 presented us with a number of issues lately. Either an errata page is in order or simply an updated FAQ. -- Gerard Beekmans /* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: make modules_install gives errors
On February 21, 2005 12:02 pm, Phoe6 wrote: > /pwd$ cp arch/i386/boot/bzImage /boot/lfskernel-2.6.8.1 > cp: cannot stat 'arch/i386/bzImage': No such file or directory. But as Those are two different paths you typed out. "boot" needs to be in the path, mabye you forgot to put it in the "cp" command? -- Gerard Beekmans /* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Kernel Panic!
You are not booting a straight kernel, but are using an initial ramdisk (initrd) setup? -- Gerard Beekmans /* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: glibc -2.3.4 (sect 6.11) make error
On February 20, 2005 06:34 pm, John Wildberger wrote: > My Q: How can I get this Perl module incorporated into my LFS. I am at > section 6.11, and so far no problems. > Any suggestions will be appreciated. My first guess would be that something didn't quite go according to plan when you installed Perl in chapter 5. You could simply try to reinstal Perl in that chapter and try Glibc again. -- Gerard Beekmans /* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Kernel Panic!
On February 21, 2005 06:28 am, Steven Pasternak wrote: > I just build an LFS 6.0 system (with some newer packages than needed) and > when I finally go to boot up, I get this: > VFS: Cannot open root device 'hdb5' or unknown block (3,69) Go back to your LFS kernel configuration and double-check to make sure you selected the right IDE drivers. Before your kernel panics, you should see messages scroll by with regards to detected hardware. It goes quick so watch closely. Check if you see any IDE messages and if it detected any harddrives and partitions. -- Gerard Beekmans /* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: about LFS license problem
On February 21, 2005 03:02 am, Bluesheet wrote: > 1/ If I using 100% LFS to be my linux system of my product, do I need LFS > license problem to sell my product? If you use LFS to create your own product the least you should do is give this project credit for it. > 3/ If I following the LFS book to build but didn't use the LFS packages, > that I download all the source from GNU and I make some scripts by myself, > do I need LFS license to sell my product? The packages we use are almost all GNU packages. Most all packages are GPL licensed and not licensed by LFS itself. You will need to check every individual package's license to see what they require of you. > 4/ If I using 100% LFS packages to build my linux system, but I erase all > the name of "LFS" and "linuxfromscratch.org" inside the code and source, do > I need LFS license to sell my product? LFS' BSD license only applies to the book and the methodology we employ to build a system. If you use our book to build your system, you should mention this somewhere. It is the right and honorable thing to do, after all. The actual software is from their respective owners. You can't take Glibc and remove its GPL license for example, unless you modify it as your own version of Glibc. Again check the licenses to see how this work. Not every package is the same. -- Gerard Beekmans /* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: File System Issues during bootup
On February 20, 2005 04:52 pm, John Gay wrote: > Mine says: Senthill, if you can provide output of that same command (tune2fs -l /dev/hda4) when you run it from Fedora Core 3, then we can compare it and offer some suggestions to you that you might try out. -- Gerard Beekmans /* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: File System Issues during bootup
On February 20, 2005 02:48 pm, Randy McMurchy wrote: > details. Search the archives for more info. There is a thread from last december: http://linuxfromscratch.org/pipermail/lfs-support/2004-December/025288.html Some snippets from the thread: This was discussed recently on list. FC3 uses some custom stuff in their ext2utils that isn't supported in the regular tarball, which causes the error. from your HOST system, do a tune2fs -l /dev/ grep features This will list the filesystem features that your new ext3 partition has been created with. It's likely that FC3 has some extensions of e2fsprogs that are not in the base distribution, and therefore not supported from within LFS. you can use tune2fs to remove features not found in LFS - use the man pages for mke2fs on LFS and on your host to see the differences in available features. --- I don't know which features FC3 has added so I can't tell you what to remove unfortuantely. I don't have an ext2 partition handy here either to give you the output of so you could compare it against yours. If nobody else here can provide their tune2fs output of an LFS partition that was formatted in a standard way I'll create a partition later today. -- Gerard Beekmans /* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: File System Issues during bootup
On February 20, 2005 02:48 pm, Randy McMurchy wrote: > IIRC, this is a known issue with FC3. Something they do to the > e2fsprogs package make it incompatible. I don't remember any > details. Search the archives for more info. search engine isn't working at the moment, working on that. If it was a recent thing then if google hasn't picked it up by now, searching will be a bit cumbersome. I hope to get it resolved asap. -- Gerard Beekmans /* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: LFS Book 6 Kbd-1.12?
On February 20, 2005 02:41 pm, Patrick Rutkowski wrote: > I'm Slightly confused as to what do DL from the page which the v6.0 > LFS book lead me to, ftp://oss.sgi.com/projects/kdb/download/ The book > says to DL kdb-1.12. I'd really appreaciate any advice. I'm not sure what went wrong. If you check the LFS book, chapter 3 - packages: Kbd (1.12) - 617 KB: http://freshmeat.net/projects/kbd/ The Freshmeat page contains a link to: Tar/GZ: ftp://ftp.win.tue.nl/pub/linux-local/utils/kbd/ From there you can find version 1.12 > This is my first post and I accidently subscribed in digest mode, so > i'm expecting to get one last (or first... since i just subscribed) > before digest mode goes off. I just checked your subscription options and it shows you aren't in digest mode anymore, so you shouldn't be received the nightly digest and message to lfs-support should arrive in your mailbox right away. -- Gerard Beekmans /* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: File System Issues during bootup
On February 20, 2005 02:25 pm, Phoe6 wrote: > > 1) Which version of e2fsprogs did you install in chapter 6 of LFS? > > e2fsprogs-1.35 > > > 2) Which version of e2fsprogs is installed in Fedora Core 3? > e2fsprogs-1.35-11.2 That doesn't look like it would be a problem. Unless FC3 applies some patches, who knows. There is a newer e2fsprogs out, version 1.36. The installation instructions are the same as LFS-6.0's e2fsprogs 1.35. Boot into FC3, mount the LFS partition and enter chroot. Install 1.36: mkdir build cd build ../configure --prefix=/usr --with-root-prefix="" \ --enable-elf-shlibs --disable-evms make make install make install-libs Exit chroot, unmount LFS, reboot into LFS and see if it works better now. -- Gerard Beekmans /* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: make modules_install gives errors
On February 20, 2005 02:19 pm, Phoe6 wrote: > I remember having installed 6.49. Module-Init-Tools-3.0 packages. Which LFS version are you following by the way? One of the configure options you pass to module-init-tools is: --prefix="" Did you skip this one, or maybe as a force of habit typed it out as "prefix=/usr?" If so, the files ended up in /usr/sbin rather than /sbin. See if the following files exist in /usr/sbin now: insmod modprobe rmmod depmod modinfo insmod.static You should be able to move those to /sbin and not reinstall the whole package. I haven't tested it, but I don't see a reason why that wouldn't work. If you want to play it safe, remove the above files from /usr/sbin and reinstall module-init-tools using the book's instructions. It doesn't take very long to install the package. > Thanks Gerard for your constant support, its highly motivating! No problem. Glad to be able to help :) -- Gerard Beekmans /* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: File System Issues during bootup
On February 20, 2005 02:06 pm, Phoe6 wrote: > Checking file systems... > fsck.ext2 : FileSystem has unsupported feature(s) /dev/hda4 > e2fsck:Get a newer version of e2fsck! It sounds like when you created the ext2 partition in Fedora Core 3, it's adding some attributes that the LFS version of e2fsprogs doesn't know about. Let's check both versions first: 1) Which version of e2fsprogs did you install in chapter 6 of LFS? 2) Which version of e2fsprogs is installed in Fedora Core 3? -- Gerard Beekmans /* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: make modules_install gives errors
On February 20, 2005 01:35 pm, Phoe6 wrote: > /bin/sh: /sbin/depmod: No such file or directory > Warning: you may need to install module-init-tools > Is this a serious error? How should I resolve this? If I ignore and > get past to copying the kernel image and proceed further, will my lfs > system work properly? The error told you what is wrong: you are missing depmod and are suggested to install module-init-tools. Did you install this package? -- Gerard Beekmans /* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Can't find /tools/bin/bash for initial chroot, and /tools/bin/bash is bad too.
On February 20, 2005 11:17 am, Steven Pasternak wrote: > Thanks! That fixed my problem with bash perfectly :-). I still, though, > can't get chroot to see /tools/bin/bash, yet it is still there if I use > /mnt/lfs or just / as root (thanks to symlinks). What is /tools/bin/bash linked to? Run "ldd /mnt/lfs/tools/bin/bash" and make sure it is not linked to libraries in /lib. It should try to find the libraries in /tools/lib. If not, then when you chroot, /lib/libc.so.6 for example doesn't exist and bash won't run. -- Gerard Beekmans /* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: kde bug or?
On February 19, 2005 06:10 am, tom wrote: > is this normal? it seems that I had to recompile freetype and fontconfig > for kde to work. It's been a known occurance for a while. I'm not sure if this got fixed in the book yet. Basically what happens, if I understand correctly and somebody please correct me if I'm wrong, you install fontconfig before Xorg (or XFree86). So the X fonts are not available yet to fontconfig. When a fontconfig app like QT and KDE apps try to use fonts things don't quite work out. I believe that was the problem. The following will fix it too without reinstalling fontconfig. It's a matter of configuring fontconfig after the X installation: Add to /etc/fonts/local.conf: /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/TTF /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/fonts/Type1 and run /usr/bin/fc-cache to update fontconfig's cache. KDE should work properly now. -- Gerard Beekmans /* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: problem with su
On February 19, 2005 02:27 am, lux-integ wrote: > I am having problems using the su command on an lfs build. I attach an > example. I read the man-page for su and tried su with -l, su with > -shell=bash. for the same or another user etc and it fails everytime. > I am wondering if the coreutls program needs re-installing. > Some help would be appreciated. First off, the file you attached was very small, only 118 bytes. There is no need to compress such a file with tar and gz. And, tar is only used if you have more than one file you want to combine into one archive file. Next time you can just attach the file as long as they are under 50 KB in size. It's easier to work with that way. Now onto your problem. Make sure /bin/su has the right permissions: it has to be setuid root to run properly. If it is not, it can't access the /etc/shadow file for password verification. Run "ls -l /bin/su" and make sure it looks like this: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ ls -l /bin/su -rwsr-xr-x 1 root root 18033 Aug 23 08:55 /bin/su If it doesn't look like that (the 18033 size and date/time can be different of course, ignore those), run: chmod 4755 /bin/su Try your su program again and see if it works now. -- Gerard Beekmans /* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: kernel panic:VFS: cannot mount root fs
On February 18, 2005 02:59 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Sir I 've already wasted 7-8 cds' due to this process.I am bein' very much By the way, have you considered rewriteable CDs? That way if a test failed you don't waste a CD. You can just format it and try again. -- Gerard Beekmans /* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: kernel panic:VFS: cannot mount root fs
You would do well checking out the LFS Livecd project. Website is at http://linuxfromscratch.org/~jhuntwork/livecd/ To create your own version based on these techniques you can get the livecd code from SVN: svn checkout svn://svn.linuxfromscratch.org/livecd There's a livecd@linuxfromscratch.org mailinglist too. -- Gerard Beekmans /* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
