startup problem: system boots, /etc/rc.d/init.d/sysklogd "hangs": is there a good way to debug this?
Hi, everyone - I've just about finished putting together an LFS system (BLFS) using v 6.3, rc2, of the book; it's using one partition of a drive with several O/S's installed on it & the GRUB that was there is booting all of them. The problem I'm having is this: when the system hits sysklogd in what appears to be runlevel 3 and runs "/etc/rc.d/init.d/sysklogd start", the machine just sits there. It's not locked up; it'll respond to && the caps lock light still works on the keyboard. I can't ^c out of the service though. sysklogd prints my message && "Starting system log daemon", then nothing; the system just sits there... Unfortunately for me I'm not leaving much in the way of a trail because the system log daemon isn't running yet. Does this sound familiar to anyone, and/or can anybody think of a good way to go about debugging this? I tried running the binary "syslogd" already; it seems to run fine in the chroot(). Best I can think of is to start hacking at /etc/rc.d/init.d/functions && putting print stmts in it until I (hopefully) find out where it's dying - I'm really hoping somebody can come up with something better than that... Thanks. Larry -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: startup problem: system boots, /etc/rc.d/init.d/sysklogd "hangs": is there a good way to debug this?
Thanks, Dan - > Before adding debugging to the functions, try booting to single user > mode (level 1). Just add 1 to the kernel command line in grub. This > should (hopefully) get you to a shell. That was pretty much all I needed right there - basically, someone to remind me to slow the heck down and look at the simplest solution, first... I had made one typo in fstab (s/defaults/default/), the result of which was that the partition with /var on it was staying mounted read-only. After I booted up like you suggested (that works exactly as stated, BTW) it didn't take too long to figure that one out. Then: mount -n -o remount,rw /dev/ /var and about 10 seconds w vi put the problem to bed for good. Everything seems to work and it's fast as all get-out; not too shabby... I used rc2 of the 6.3 version of the book; looks like a number of things changed between then and "release level"... For one, I noticed that ifconfig was on the live CD (rc2 is still using "ip" to do everything). While I don't mind "ip", I'm tempted to use ifconfig from the standpoint of consistency... While this isn't my first system build, it certainly was the least painful, thanks largely to the book. Initially, I was planning on using the book to supplement my notes and nothing more; having used it, and having been extremely impressed by it, I'm leaning very strongly now towards using it as a "design document". Next up is X and I can only hope that goes a fraction as well. Oh yeah - this machine is running kernel 2.6.23, rc4, with the -mm1 patchset. The speed I've seen from the 2.6.23 kernels is like nothing else I can remember... Thanks again, Larry -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: startup problem: system boots, /etc/rc.d/init.d/sysklogd "hangs": is there a good way to debug this?
Hi, Dan - > ... I'd had no-boot errors twice because of typos in fstab which were > silent because of that. Booting still failed, but at least I got to see > the error being thrown by fsck. Here's the change: > > http://wiki.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/changeset/8315 > > Does that make a difference in your case? Maybe... unfortunately, it's difficult to do much more than catch a glimpse of much of anything at that point; everything's flying by at top speed. I did a little experimentation and put some output stmts in that script; I knew they were there and I had a hard time seeing them. I might have caught it if I'd had "boot_delay" turned on been using your newer script code; one of the collection of kernel patches I/we have includes one which adds a kernel param "boot_delay=N" where N is the # milliseconds to wait between messages. Having "mountfs" complain (very) loudly about it wouldn't be a bad idea either, though at this point, I'm thinking about a "pre-flight checklist" sort of utility - something like SAMBA's "testparm" only system-wide; it's not the first time I've gotten myself w typos, flat-out forgot altogether to create this or that file, etc. >> I used rc2 of the 6.3 version of the book; looks like a number of things >> changed between then and "release level"... For one, I noticed that >> ifconfig was on the live CD (rc2 is still using "ip" to do everything). >> While I don't mind "ip", I'm tempted to use ifconfig from the standpoint of >> consistency... > > Not too much changed between rc2 and the final edition, but you may be > interested in grabbing the final bootscripts and udev-config tarballs. > BTW, what you see on the LiveCD is LFS + lots of extras determined by > the LiveCD team. If you prefer ifconfig, you can always build > net-tools from BLFS. > > http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/svn/basicnet/net-tools.html > That makes more sense now. I had thought the build on the Live CD was pretty much what the book would end up producing less X, but that's fine; I'm actually happier that it doesn't: while the rationale for this excercise is multi-fold; part of it has everything to do with being completely sick of having to scrape off what RedHat (et al.) decided I should have installed. Debian is better in that regard, but one has to learn Debian's design. I would rather put that same time into learning my own, but lacked anything even remotely resembling a design document. I was starting to put one together, ran into LFS in the process, decided to give it a try, and, here we are. I'm definitely going to grab the final bootscripts && udev config files > The builtin network services will still use ip, but you can use > ifconfig interactively or whatever. I think most people keep ifconfig > around for comfort's sake. I do, although I'm starting to get used to > the ip usage. Yeah, that's pretty much the way it is here, too. When I said "consistent" I meant more "consistent with the way ifconfig and the rest of the net-tools package behaves (or doesn't)", not just "consistent w ifconfig" - which really isn't all that consistent from one net-tools version to another in a number of nasty, subtle little ways - but that's another story. Personally, I'd much rather switch everything over to iproute2; it tends to "just work". Unfortunately, RedHat and Debian et al. have been dragging their heels in that regard (though Debian does, at least, have an iproute2 package available, if you know enough to use it instead of net-tools). The unfortunate fact of the matter is that a large number of scripts in RedHat / Fedora would break; there's no layer of abstraction between the tools and the scripts. Thanks for the info & for getting back to me so quickly, I really appreciate it. Excellent job on the book, too. Where would I look w/ respect to volunteering to help make future versions of LFS a reality? - Larry -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: LFS and apt
Peter, While there's no reason you can't use them on other distributions, keep in mind that apt and dpkg are very Debian-centric. That said, do you have a Debian system you can use for reference? I think your problem stems from not having one of the configuration files for apt set up correctly; in /etc/apt, you need a "sources.list" file, and will probably want an apt.conf file at a bare minimum - apt uses those two files (plus "preferences" plus "equivs" if they exist) to determine what version of what package to do what with on any given system. It uses a fairly complex set of rules & algorithm for doing that. You might want to check out the "Apt HOWTO": http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/apt-howto/ch-apt-get.en.html#s-default-ver sion These may be of thelp to you as well: http://people.debian.org/~dburrows/aptitude-doc/en/rn01re01.html http://jaqque.sbih.org/kplug/apt-pinning.html http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r18645940-Sources-Backports-and-aptconf Once you understand how "apt" works, how dpkg works should make a little more sense (or vice-versa). They're *not* the same as a package manager such as "RPM", and about all trying to use them the same way got me was more grey hair. I know there are versions of apt around for distributions other than Debian; about all I know, though, is that they exist. Hope that helps. - Larry Peter Haack writes: > Hi, there! > First of all, I want you to excuse my bad english. ;) > And second, I have a question: > I installed apt and dpkg on LFS (ALFS). > > Versions: > apt:0.7.6 > dpgk:1.14.5 > Kernel:linux-2.6.16.38 > > I installed by reading the followed: > > http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/hints/downloads/files/apt.txt > > Thats quite old, but I found no other. > > It runs, but when I try to install packages, i get the following messages: > > (with apt) > > "package architecture (i386) does not match system" > > My architecture is i686. I thought i386 is compatible to i686? > > Ok, try it the hard way: > > "dpkg -i --force-architecture" > > then I receive: > > "cannot access archive: No such file or directory" > > What the heck? I dont know whats missing here. I have the following > directories for dpkg to search in: > > /var/cache/apt/archives/partial > /var/state/apt/lists/partial > > Has someone a hint for me? > > -- > http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support > FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html > Unsubscribe: See the above information page -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: LFS and apt
Hi, Peter - > Well, I`m using Debian for nearly two years, and I know the usage of apt > and dpkg. I have a sources.list configured on my LFS system, and the > packages are being downloaded, but not installed. Ah, ok. For a minute there I thought you might have assumed that apt was yet another brain-dead software update app. I had to create an apt.conf as apt kept bombing every time I used more than a handful of mirrors; all of my systems are "mixed", so I need at least two sets. The other thing it does is establish which release is your default (etch, lenny, or sid); here's mine: APT::Default-Release "stable"; APT::Cache-Limit "8388608"; Two questions: what does "apt-cache policy" say that apt is going to try to download? And, when you say they're getting downloaded but not installed - does dpkg -L name-of-package (eg., dpkg -L net-tools) come back with "the package is not installed", or ??? Is the package at least ending up in /var/cache/apt? If it is, what happens when you try to manually install it w dpkg? Also, where'd you get the code for apt? I'm wondering if it's a dependency problem... Here are the libraries apt-get and dpkg are using: $ ldd `which apt-get` libapt-pkg-libc6.3-6.so.3.11 => /usr/lib/libapt-pkg-libc6.3-6.so.3.11 (0x2b655c1f7000) libstdc++.so.6 => /usr/lib/libstdc++.so.6 (0x2b655c3b8000) libm.so.6 => /lib/libm.so.6 (0x2b655c5b7000) libgcc_s.so.1 => /lib/libgcc_s.so.1 (0x2b655c739000) libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0x2b655c846000) /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x2b655c0df000) $ ldd `which dpkg` libpthread.so.0 => /lib/libpthread.so.0 (0x2b8bee0f3000) libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0x2b8bee208000) /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x2b8bedfdb000) I just checked several of them, they all seem to be using pretty much the same libraries. Is it a case where you do an: $ apt-get update $ apt-get -y install whatever and it downloads the thing but then abends before it installs it? If so, what does apt's output say? Do you have gpg keys enabled? What does dpkg say the state of the package is afterwards (partially installed, etc.?) (dpkg --list | grep packagename) I'm curious as to how you make out with this; I can think of a number of things it'd be terrific for (why reinvent the wheel...). - Larry -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Compilation of ncurses (chapter 5) with gpm
Nicolas, I'm not having a problem w builing ncurses in ch 5 or 6; from the subject of your post, it seems as though this is occurring the first time you build it, right? The output logs from the last build I did show: checking if you want to link with the GPM mouse library... maybe checking for gpm.h... no for both builds. It looks to me like you might have a larger problem; my guess is that you're still using your build host's header files and libraries @ that point. See "5.7. Adjusting the Toolchain"; by the time you reach first ncurses build (5.13) you should be using only the libraries etc. that you've built up to that point (from 5.7: "From this point onwards, everything will link only against the libraries in /tools/lib."). Unless you decided to install gpm very early on I don't see how you could have gpm.h, the gpm library, etc. at that point. I would suggest checking to see that your build environment is set up correctly. Just a thought & I hope it helps. - Larry -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: PCMCIA/udev help
David,
> ... I just installed LFS 6.3 on an old laptop (Dell
> Latitude CPi D300XT). My network interface is a Xircom Ethernet 10/100 and
> 56k modem combo PCMCIA card. It worked fine with the LFS LiveCD, but when I
> booted into the new LFS system, I get an "eth0 doesn't exist" message on
> bootup.
Well, at least you know the hardware works without any esoteric driver(s),
etc.; could be worse...
> I've double-checked that all the PCMCIA and Xircom items are set in the
> kernel (it's all compiled in; no modules). Looking at dmesg, the bridge
> appears to be detected fine. In addition, when I remove/insert the card, I
> get a message like "pccard: PCMCIA card inserted into slot 0". So it looks
> like I'm almost there. What am I missing?
I would boot up with the live CD and start by looking to see if there's an
"alias eth0" line in /etc/modprobe.conf; I'm not sure if they have one there
or not). For ex. an Intel e-net pro 10/100 NIC uses the e100 driver; it
also uses the mii.ko driver but modprobe is smart enough to figure that part
out). So, /etc/modprobe.conf would contain:
alias eth0 e100
You can see what modules your NIC depends on using "modinfo". From there,
lsmod | grep e100, lsmod | grep mii, etc.; try to determine what, exactly,
is being loaded.
> The PCMCIA howto
> (http://kernel.org/pub/linux/utils/kernel/pcmcia/howto.html) suggests that
> I may need to set a "resource database", but doesn't really say how to go
> about doing that.
>
> If it's more likely on the udev side,
> /etc/udev/rules.d/70-persistent-net.rules says:
>
> SUBSYSTEM=="net", DRIVERS="?*", ATTRS{address}=="00:10:a4:02:f5:6b",
> NAME="eth0"
>
> Pretty sure that's the right MAC address. I can provide more info from
> running under the LiveCD... I just don't know what info would be useful.
I would try running "udevmonitor" - start it without the card being in the
system, then fire up udevmonitor, then plug the card in - dump the whole
thing to a file; there will be a of output. Something like:
udevmonitor 2>&1 | tee out.dat
ought to work. I would also run udevinfo against anything related to the
card; if you're not familiar w its syntax it can be somewhat daunting to
become so, but I think you'll find it worth the time & aggrivation. A quick
example - if I have a USB device, I could start off with:
cat /proc/bus/usb/devices
That would dump several lines for everything attached to the machine via the
USB; I would find the one I wanted, say, for ex it was this one:
T: Bus=01 Lev=01 Prnt=01 Port=01 Cnt=01 Dev#= 3 Spd=1.5 MxCh= 0
D: Ver= 1.10 Cls=00(>ifc ) Sub=00 Prot=00 MxPS= 8 #Cfgs= 1
P: Vendor=0764 ProdID=0501 Rev= 0.01
S: Manufacturer=CPS
S: Product= CP 1300D
C:* #Ifs= 1 Cfg#= 1 Atr=c0 MxPwr= 50mA
I:* If#= 0 Alt= 0 #EPs= 1 Cls=03(HID ) Sub=00 Prot=00 Driver=usbhid
E: Ad=81(I) Atr=03(Int.) MxPS= 8 Ivl=10ms
which tells me I want to look at /proc/bus/usb/001/003 (the 001 is from the
"Bus=01", the 003 from the "Dev#= 3"). So one udevinfo query that should
produce useful results is:
udevinfo -a -n bus/usb/001/003
If you do this on the live CD you should eventually find something that
triggers some other action; using my USB NIC for an example, that something
is this rule:
ACTION=="add",BUS=="usb",DRIVER=="prism2_usb",RUN+="/etc/wlan/wlan-udev.sh
%k"
which states that udev should run the specified program "if the action it's
processing is an 'add', and it occurred on the USB bus, and the driver
involved is 'prism2_usb.ko'". Without that, the adapter won't work,
irregardless of whether I have its driver modprobed or built into the kernel
or not; in this case, building the module into the kernel would actually
cause this setup to not work correctly because of the way that the rule is
written.
You should be able to tell how the kernel on the CD was built by looking in
/boot; there should be a file named config-something or similar; it'll
contain all the "CONFIG_USETHIS=Y" generated by "make menuconfig" et al.
You've got the card manager daemon running (cardmgr), right? It uses its
own "config.opts" file - which it calls a resource file - you have to set
various options for cards in it... I would check the setup you have against
the one on the cd (and make sure the daemon's running).
Hopefully, that will help you uncover what, exactly, it is that isn't
happening; with any luck, whatever "it" is - and keep in mind that there may
be more than one "it" - will become apparent fairly quickly.
- Larry
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: LiveCD or No LiveCD?
Jeremy Huntwork wrote: > Eric Stout wrote: > >> But main stream distros these days have a lot more tools available to them >> than the LiveCD can even dream of (simple technological fact due to the >> storage capacity of the medium; CD/DVD versus HD) and typically include a >> very simple means of installing what tools you don't have. Installing >> mdadm on the LiveCD two years ago was an outright pain compared to apt-get >> install mdadm. >> > > This speaks of other possibilities that could arise. The current CD can > already be modified to boot from a USB drive or other HD. If we move to > package management on the CD (mostly for the sake of development > purposes) it wouldn't be difficult to allow users to add other > non-standard (but pre-built and prepared) packages on request. > -- > JH > Do people consider LFS a learning tool, or a distro? If its the former, then maybe the livecd isn't required, if its the latter, the livecd is essential, imagine having to install XP to install Vista? I think the market would vote with its feet. On a personal note, i'm a huge fan of the livecd, it's never crashed on me or failed to support hardware in 5 different PC's, and using it with VMWare is a breeze, which is another consideration actually. For educational use, if a base distro is needed, and someone chooses to do this inside a VM, no livecd will force them to download and install a distro to VM just to build LFS, that would be annoying. As for community involvement, if there was an easy way to see a list of things to be done, i'm sure more people would get involved, at the moment the contribute page on the website doesn't offer any way to get involved in the development. As for the mailing list being quiet, I think a lot of people these days are actually more comfortable with IRC than mailing lists, the channel often seems popular. Regards Phill -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: LFS 'screen' in VmWare
lanas wrote: > Hi all, > > When booting a stock LFS system using VmWare (eg. that normally runs > Fedora) the resulting text screen is rather small. Is there some > parameter, perhaps a kernel parameter, or a font modification that > could make the text/console screen larger ? > > Thanks. > You can force a specific resolution in vmware under the edit VM - Display properties which could help. By stock LFS do you mean a system you have already built or the livecd? I guess for the livecd it'd be easier to pass it as a kernel parameter with VGA=option. If you have already built the system, i think /etc/console has default settings for the default font etc.. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: What next? [Was: Re: LiveCD or No LiveCD?]
Jeremy Huntwork wrote: > Jeremy Huntwork wrote: > >> * Does the community still want the LiveCD project? (Consider that a >> couple of the arguments above imply that the LFS LiveCD by its nature is >> degrading the quality of LFS) >> >> * If so, is the community prepared to lend help in keeping it alive? >> > > Thank you all for your comments and consideration. I ran through the > lists quickly this morning and came up with the following: > > 20 people expressed their appreciation for the CD, more than half voting > to keep the project around. Also, several either offered to contribute > or suggested ways in which the project may be improved. > > 2 people explicitly voted to drop the project. > > I could let this thread continue for some more time, but I get the > impression that the ratio of votes will continue approximately the same. > > So the real question now becomes, where do we go from here? There have > been a few suggestions put forward as to what may help future > development and what will alleviate the original concerns brought up. I > will try to lay down what I recall: > > * Go back to the drawing board, so to speak. Start a new CD from scratch > that is minimal (and minimal means minimal, not just 'without X') and > re-define core concepts that the CD will adhere closely to. (For > example, as proof of the soundness of LFS, the CD should strictly adhere > to LFS. If we adopt this one aspect, we should also be able to make use > of ALFS development to produce the CD, instead of maintaining a full set > of separate scripts.) > > * As has been suggested from a long time ago, make use of package > management in the build process, especially for BLFS packages. This > would allow at least two benefits: an easier development process, and > greater extensibility/customization. > > * Add an LFS-style document to the project that teaches how to create a > LiveCD from scratch. > > * Devise methods for users to more easily provide feedback and make it > easier to contribute as a whole. > > What are your thoughts on the above? And are there any other > suggestions, either new ones or ones that I missed? > > -- > JH > Sounds good to me, perhaps for the community bug report/todo list the different areas of the FromScratch projects could combine forces to look at implementing a single system that works across all, it would enable a single signup of a 'contributor' account to work with all the projects as the need/time arises. If you use PHP on your boxes i'd be happy to offer my modest skills to *help* with something like this, I say help because i have 3 outstanding projects which pay my wages, so my time is limited :) Regards Phill -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: What next? [Was: Re: LiveCD or No LiveCD?]
Laurent HOAREAU wrote: > Jeremy Huntwork a écrit : > >> Jeremy Huntwork wrote: >> >> >>> * Does the community still want the LiveCD project? >>> > (Consider that a > >>> couple of the arguments above imply that the LFS >>> > LiveCD by its nature is > >>> degrading the quality of LFS) >>> >>> * If so, is the community prepared to lend help in >>> > keeping it alive? > >>> >>> >> Thank you all for your comments and consideration. I >> > ran through the > >> lists quickly this morning and came up with the >> > following: > >> 20 people expressed their appreciation for the CD, >> > more than half voting > >> to keep the project around. Also, several either >> > offered to contribute > >> or suggested ways in which the project may be >> > improved. > >> 2 people explicitly voted to drop the project. >> >> I could let this thread continue for some more time, >> > but I get the > >> impression that the ratio of votes will continue >> > approximately the same. > >> So the real question now becomes, where do we go >> > from here? There have > >> been a few suggestions put forward as to what may >> > help future > >> development and what will alleviate the original >> > concerns brought up. I > >> will try to lay down what I recall: >> >> * Go back to the drawing board, so to speak. Start a >> > new CD from scratch > >> that is minimal (and minimal means minimal, not just >> > 'without X') and > >> re-define core concepts that the CD will adhere >> > closely to. (For > >> example, as proof of the soundness of LFS, the CD >> > should strictly adhere > >> to LFS. If we adopt this one aspect, we should also >> > be able to make use > >> of ALFS development to produce the CD, instead of >> > maintaining a full set > >> of separate scripts.) >> >> > Hum, if you choose to build the cd without X, we loose > the advantage of > multi windows (impossible then to see the LFS book and > the terminal used > to build LFS in the same time for example). In a world > where most people > come from graphical environment, it could be a > problem... But the use of > alfs could reduce the problem... > >> * As has been suggested from a long time ago, make >> > use of package > >> management in the build process, especially for BLFS >> > packages. This > >> would allow at least two benefits: an easier >> > development process, and > >> greater extensibility/customization. >> >> > Very good idea, but have you enough time to make that. > I'm very > interesting by this idea and if you want help in this > way, I'm could be > ok... > >> * Add an LFS-style document to the project that >> > teaches how to create a > >> LiveCD from scratch. >> >> * Devise methods for users to more easily provide >> > feedback and make it > >> easier to contribute as a whole. >> >> What are your thoughts on the above? And are there >> > any other > >> suggestions, either new ones or ones that I missed? >> >> -- >> JH >> >> > > > > > > > _ > Ne gardez plus qu'une seule adresse mail ! Copiez vos mails vers Yahoo! Mail > http://mail.yahoo.fr > > Multiple 'windows' don't require X, personally i logon to 2 or 3 virtual terminals, carry out the lfs build work in terminal 1 and have a copy of the book open via lynx in terminal 2, then i can simply select with the mouse to highlight and right click in VT1 to paste. To open another session press ALT+F# where # is a number, then you can rattle between them in much the same way as you'd use gui desktop windows. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: LFS in VmWare: switching between consoles
lanas wrote: > Hello, > > That could be a VmWare question but I figure LFS users who are using > VmWare surely have bumped into this before. How can one switch from > one console to another ? On a real machine we use Ctrl-Alt-F2 for > instance. With VmWare this does not work as the host picks it up. Is > it possible to switch between multiple consoles in VmWare when running > lFS at all ? > > Thanks, > > Al > Hi, I use VMware Workstation V6.something with linux as the host os, as long as the vmware terminal is active, simply ALT+F1/2/etc.. works fine for me, host has never picked it up. This didn't need vmware tools, simply works by default as I normally run 3 terms in lfs. Regards Phill Upson -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: LFS 6.3 CH 5.17 Diffutils-2.8.1
nick wrote: > I get the following error from make install. > > Any tips? > > lfs:/mnt/lfs/sources/diffutils-2.8.1$ make install > Making install in doc > make[1]: Entering directory `/mnt/lfs/sources/diffutils-2.8.1/doc' > make[2]: Entering directory `/mnt/lfs/sources/diffutils-2.8.1/doc' > make[2]: Nothing to be done for `install-exec-am'. > /bin/sh ../config/mkinstalldirs /usr/local/info > mkdir -p -- /usr/local/info > mkdir: cannot create directory `/usr/local/info': Permission denied > make[2]: *** [install-info-am] Error 1 > make[2]: Leaving directory `/mnt/lfs/sources/diffutils-2.8.1/doc' > make[1]: *** [install-am] Error 2 > make[1]: Leaving directory `/mnt/lfs/sources/diffutils-2.8.1/doc' > make: *** [install-recursive] Error 1 > > Afternoon, The bit you're looking for is mkdir: cannot create directory `/usr/local/info': Permission denied If you are in chapter 5, something went wrong with your configure command because its trying to install into /usr, which in chapter 5 is still your host system, i'd guess this is where you are because you are logged in as user lfs. If you are in chapter 6 however, you should be root to install diffutils into /usr. Hope this helps. Regards Phill Upson -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: VMWare Network Interface driver needed.
Loren Foret wrote:
> What I mean by support tools is the VMware support tools cd. If you look in
> the vmware support directory. ie /usr/local/vmware, you will see several
> .iso images. mount the linux one and install the support tools .tar.gz
> source that's in there. Under your vmware console, click on VM-install
> support tools.
>
> Hope this helps clear that up.
>
> Loren Foret
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dan Barker
> Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2008 12:20 PM
> To: 'LFS Support List'
> Subject: RE: VMWare Network Interface driver needed.
>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2008 10:03 AM
> To: lfs-support@linuxfromscratch.org
> Subject: VMWare Network Interface driver needed.
>
> I've moved my [working] LFS 6.3 from real SATA to VMWARE (Server 1.0.4)SCSI.
> I added the BusLogic SCSI support in the kernel and it boots fine.
>
> However, it can't find eth0.
>
> lspci says: "Ethernet controller: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] 79c970
> [PCnet32 LANCE] (rev 10)".
>
> I've enabled all AMD I can find in the kernel, and no joy. Anyone
> know how to see the VMWare virtualized NIC?
>
> The LFS-Live CD sees it fine.
>
> Dan Barker
>
>
> _
>
> Enabling them in the kernel should have done it. Try installing the support
> tools as they contain source for kernel modules for the PCNET and VLANCE
> cards.
>
> Loren Foret
>
> ----
> Lovely word, "should".
> PCNET is enabled.
> LANC does not appear in my .config, on or off, except inside of BALANCE.
> I'm not sure what you mean by "support tools". net-tools, libtool and
> module-iinit-tools are all installed (I was deep into X in blfs before I had
> to move the machine).
>
> Is there a package I need to install to make VLANCE be there? What? Whatever
> it is, the Live CD doesn't need it. My old Slackware 2.4 doesn't need it.
>
> dmesg | grep eth shows "eth0: registered as Pcnet/PCI II 79C970A" which is
> encouraging, but the network won't activate ("eth0 not found").
>
>
>
If you have compiled the nic module into the kernel (amd pcnet32 from
memory for vmware workstation edition) then i'm guessing it could be
udev. Udev needs to create the device node and in lfs you set rules to
make the interface name consistent, during lfs you did this in the page:
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/stable/chapter07/network.html
by creating the rules based on MAC address. Now you have moved LFS from
a real machine to the VM, the MAC address has changed, I believe you are
probably loading the module fine, then not creating the device,
consequently no further operations designed to work on /dev/eth0 are
being carried out. Try recreating the rules for udev and let us know
how you get on.
Regards
Phill Upson
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: LFS Version SVN-20080423 - Constructing a Temporary System - Glibc-2.7 - compilation fails
Hi, I believe you need gawk rather than mawk, try installing it and running make again to see what happens, fingers crossed. Regards Phill Upson Mag. Leonhard Landrock wrote: > Hi all! > > Some time ago I got a LFS up and running. :-) > > Now I take another try with the latest version. My base system is Debian > Lenny. > > In "5.6. Glibc-2.7" make doesn' work as expected. > > As I have no idea so far where the problem is I post the whole output of make > after a second invocation. > > If I understand it right something with "mawk -f scripts/gen-sorted.awk" went > wrong. > > Maybe there is anyone who has a good idea. > > Leonhard. > -- 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
Hi there,
I think you are missing the driver for your hard disk controller in the
kernel (or as a module to be loaded by initrd). Try booting from a
livecd again and look at the output of lspci and lsmod, try to work out
which module is your disk controller, then recompile your lfs kernel to
include that driver, replace the kernel and reboot. After your
extensive testing, I can't think of what else it could be!
Regards
Phill Upson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm trying to move an IDE LFS drive from an older "PATA" computer to a new
> "SATA" computer. I've been unsuccessful so far.
> After literally hundreds of iterations/permutations of Master/Slave, various
> 'rdev' settings, BIOS settings, "kernel ... root=/dev/..." in GRUB, Linux
> versions (with/without 'udev'), ETC., all boot attempts typically fail with
> the infamous "VFS" three error lines:
>
> "VFS: Cannot open root device "hd.." or unknown-block (x,y)
> Please append a correct "root=" boot option
> Kernel panic - not syncing: VFS: Unable to mount root fs or
> unknown-block(x,y)"
>
> In short, the boot sequence never gets to mount my file system and then to
> trigger 'init', at which point I would obviously have a fighting chance to
> bring the boot to a happy ending (I do expect some inconsistencies, names to
> be resolved, etc. on the new machine). The alternative, building "from
> scratch" a new Linux on a SATA drive is scary.
>
> COMMENTS and CLUES
>
> 1. I've tested with either of two IDE drives, one 2.6.9 (non-LFS, non-udev),
> the other 2.6.24.4 (with udev-120). Both work flawlessly on the old, "PATA"
> PC. Both have the expected "boot" points ("/dev/hdax", etc.) manually
> included to eliminate possible 'udev' limitations and/or suspicions here.
>
> 2. GRUB (0.96) works A-OK (otherwise I wouldn't get to the VFS point in the
> uncompressed kernel, nor to my original, unaltered "root=..." kernel boot
> option, as shown on the VFS first error line).
>
> 3. The new "SATA" machine does boot either IDE drive OK. I can always
> confirm it with my first DOS partition which is chainloaded without any
> problem by GRUB (my first partition on any drive is always a little bootable
> DOS, for rainy days).
>
> 4. As far as I know, the IDE drive is seen by the new PC as "hda" ("hdb" if
> Slave). This I got when booted on a 2.4 Rescue Floppy. Funny, a Knoppix CD
> sees it as "hde" or "hdf". Anyway, I tried all reasonable possibilities -
> including "sdx"'s. Luckily, my new machine is a speed demon, so I'd hit the
> reset button and try a new combination.
> The SATA drive, when connected, is "sda", of course.
>
> 5. So far, the only thing I haven't tried that I can think of is using
> "initrd". I figure if boot (and GRUB) has been working fine on my old
> machine without this contraption, why adding this extra unknown/complication
> now. Obviously, if anybody can demonstrate its necessity under the new
> circumstances and configuration I'll hop on it.
>
> 6. GRUB (like I said, works admirably) uses a menu looking something like this
>
>title Linux LFS-2.6.24.4
> root (hd0,3)
> kernel /boot/LFSkernel root=/dev/hda4
>title DOS 6.21
> rootnoverify (hd0,0)
> chainloader +1
>
> NOTE: No other commands, but I do play with drive names/numbers during
> tests.
>
> REFERENCES
>
> 1. The "old" "PATA" board is an ASUS "P4S533-MX". Two "genuine" IDE
> controllers/connectors.
> 2. The "new" "SATA" board is an ASUS "P5E-VM HDMI". One ATA IDE port (off a
> JMicron JMB368 PATA controller) and six SATA ports (off intel's ICH9R).
>
> CLOSING WORDS
>
> Any helpful comments/suggestions/questions are invited and highly appreciated.
> It'd make me even happier if I could hear from someone who successfully
> pulled this stunt I've been miserably failing to.
>
> Thanks,
> -- Alex
>
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Connecting to the Internet
/etc/resolv.conf is to store your name servers for dns resolution rather than your IP, but I think this can be ignored as your wireless router is likely to be a dhcp server and a dns relay too, in which case dhcp would update resolv.conf anyway (unless configured not to do so). 2 main questions I guess, do we have a device for the wlan card at all? You mention other distro's using ndiswrapper, but I'm not sure if you have tried it on lfs yet, or attempted to build a driver into the kernel. If neither, have a look at whether there are any native linux drivers for your device, and if not grab a copy of ndiswrapper, I also recommend downloading dhcpcd to manage your connection setup. I guess the other issue could be wireless security? I don't use wireless so I've no idea how this goes on linux, if everything else looks good you could try switching to open mode for a few mins as a test. Hope something in there is of some use. Regards Phill Upson Michael wrote: > Today, I finished the LFS book, and booted into my first linux install that I > compiled myself! > > Since I want to go deeper, and make it a full pledged desktop environment, I > headed over to the BLFS book. I know it sounds like I'm on the wrong mailing > list, but stick with me. > > I get to a part where I have to get a patch off of the internet. I installed > wget, and when I went to download the patch, I realized that I wasn't > connected to the internet. > > So, after checking through everything, I believe I set up the network card > properly, according to the LFS book. My wireless USB card is an Encore > ENUWI-ZDPR. It's a cheap little thing, but it works fine on a pre-compiled > distro. > > Anyways, on boot, I noticed it said something about the interface for wlan0 > doesn't exist. (I know wlan sounds like the LAN port, but it is indeed the > wireless device.) > > On other distro's, I have to set it up using NDIS Wrappers. I'm not sure how > much that matters, but I figured it couldn't hurt to volunteer that > information. > > So basically, even though I need the internet connection for BLFS, I messed > up setting it up in LFS, thus the reason I choose this mailing list instead. > > Sadly, hardwiring isn't a solution, as the router is simply too far away from > the computer. > > Thanks for the help! > > Also, before I forget. For /etc/resolv.conf file, what do I put in the > domain line? Would that be the IP I show the world, or what would it be? > > > > -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Building lfs on Ubuntu 8.04
Good morning, The issue is with the prerequisites, LFS needs Gawk to build but Ubuntu comes with Mawk (as indicated in the error below). If you use apt to remove mawk and install gawk you should be able to proceed trouble free. Regards Phill Upson rsoares wrote: > Hi, > > When I get the build of glibc-2.5.1, configure goes fine but make gives > me the error: > > mawk -f scripts/gen-sorted.awk: line 19: runaway regular expression /, > "", subd ... > make[1]: ** No rule to make target '/home/lfs/glibc-build/Versions.all' > needed by '/home/lfs/glibc-build/abi-versions.h' .Stop. > > Anyone know why this is? I've built lfs on another os before no trouble > at all. > > Thanks for your time. > > Sincerely, > R.Soares > -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: lfs installation issue
Dan Nicholson wrote: > On Mon, Aug 25, 2008 at 7:14 AM, Satish Patel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Hi >> >> >> Tell me can i install ubuntu to build lfs ? its possible to >> build it? >> or which OS i use to build lfs Redhat 9.0 ? >> Ubuntu is fine with the exception of gawk, it uses mawk instead which lfs doesn't like. If you do use ubuntu, remember to remove mawk and install gawk before you begin. I believe as mawk has a gawk symlink, its not easy to spot it swapped it when you run the hostreqs script. Regards Phill -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Boot Scripts: Multiple IP Addresses
Mark A. Olbert wrote: > I need to configure my LFS box to multihome the external Ethernet connection > (which is eth1 on my machine). I can do this manually by issuing: > > ifconfig eth1:1 > > But I'd appreciate some advice/suggestions on how to do this via the boot > scripts. The obvious thing I tried -- creating a directory called > /etc/sysconfig/network-devices/ifconfig.eth1:1 and populating an ipv4 file in > it appropriately -- didn't work. Or rather, it added the second IP address to > the eth1 interface, but it didn't show up in the ifconfig report and weird > things started happening to my LAN connectivity. > > - Mark > > > __ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature > database 3416 (20080904) __ > > The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. > > http://www.eset.com > > IIRC, the version of ifconfig installed by default isn't the full monty, have a look for it in blfs and install that one, then see if ifconfig picks up your virtual adapter. Regards Phill -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: verify build files for LFS
sparrow wrote: > I mean the md5 values from the source or author, not from someone who > downloaded them and then did an md5. There are locations to download the > source files to build them, but not to download the md5. This page link > has the download sources, but no link to download the md5. The GNU > sources have signatures that can be verified from the author of the > packages, but not necessarily md5. > I don't quite get what you are after, if you are downloading a file from the authors site, and you also want an md5 from the same site to confirm the download, its kind of pointless. If the site has been hacked and the original source replaced with something else, it stands to reason that the md5 (on the same site) would be compromised also. The download will reach you in original condition thanks to the fact that tcp/ip does error checking as it goes. As for instructions on confirming the md5 on each page, ideally you should do it before you begin at all, its pointless getting halfway through the project just to find you have a bad copy of something. Regards Phill -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: verify build files for LFS
> It is pointless? I don't get what you are after? It is pointless to > download a file and then to compute an md5 and say that it is the md5 > for that file. When you go to download a file, there is usually an md5 > for that download and there is also sometimes a signature. The signature > will verify that the md5 is from the author and not from someone who > just downloaded it themselves and posted an md5 from their download. > > The md5 values posted in LFS 6.4. where did they come from and who made > them? I could not find the md5 values from the sources web sites and > could not find signatures either. > > Please advise. > As you say, not all package authors provide their md5sums, but lfs can't force them to, that would be something to take up with each package owner. As for who supplied the md5 values when creating the book, you'd need to look at the changelog to see which lfs author posted them, it would then be a fair bet they calculated the md5 from the original source themselves. I guess if its a paranoia issue (which is fine, and what motivates a good percentage of linux users) then just download your packages from the authors homepage when they don't supply md5s. hth Phill -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Glibc: cpu does not support x86_64
Bingzheng Wu wrote: > Hi men, > > I followed the Linux From Scratch, Version 6.4 exactly. > > At 5.7. Glibc-2.8-20080929, `make`, it failed: > > > gawk -f ../scripts/gen-as-const.awk > ../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/x86_64/ucontext_i.sym \ >| gcc -B/tools/bin/ -S -o > /mnt/lfs/sources/glibc-build/ucontext_i.hT3 -std=gnu99 -fgnu89-inline > -O2 -Wall -Winline -Wwrite-strings -fmerge-all-constants -g > -march=i486 -mtune=native -Wstrict-prototypes -I../include > -I/mnt/lfs/sources/glibc-build/csu -I/mnt/lfs/sources/glibc-build > -I../sysdeps/x86_64/elf -I../nptl/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/x86_64 > -I../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/x86_64 > -I../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/wordsize-64 > -I../nptl/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux -I../nptl/sysdeps/pthread > -I../sysdeps/pthread -I../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux -I../sysdeps/gnu > -I../sysdeps/unix/common -I../sysdeps/unix/mman -I../sysdeps/unix/inet > -I../nptl/sysdeps/unix/sysv -I../sysdeps/unix/sysv > -I../sysdeps/unix/x86_64 -I../nptl/sysdeps/unix -I../sysdeps/unix > -I../sysdeps/posix -I../sysdeps/x86_64/fpu -I../nptl/sysdeps/x86_64 > -I../sysdeps/x86_64 -I../sysdeps/wordsize-64 > -I../sysdeps/ieee754/ldbl-96 -I../sysdeps/ieee754/dbl-64 > -I../sysdeps/ieee754/flt-32 -I../sysdeps/ieee754 > -I../sysdeps/generic/elf -I../sysdeps/generic -I../nptl -I.. > -I../libio -I. -nostdinc -isystem > /mnt/lfs/tools/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.3.2/include > -isystem > /mnt/lfs/tools/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/4.3.2/include-fixed > -isystem /tools/include -D_LIBC_REENTRANT -include > ../include/libc-symbols.h -DHAVE_INITFINI -x c - \ >-MD -MP -MF > /mnt/lfs/sources/glibc-build/ucontext_i.h.dT -MT > '/mnt/lfs/sources/glibc-build/ucontext_i.h.d > /mnt/lfs/sources/glibc-build/ucontext_i.h' > :1: error: CPU you selected does not support x86-64 instruction set > make[2]: *** [/mnt/lfs/sources/glibc-build/ucontext_i.h] Error 1 > make[2]: Leaving directory `/mnt/lfs/sources/glibc-2.8-20080929/csu' > make[1]: *** [csu/subdir_lib] Error 2 > make[1]: Leaving directory `/mnt/lfs/sources/glibc-2.8-20080929' > make: *** [all] Error 2 > > > My host system is : Fedora 8-64 bits > My cpu is : Intel E2200 > > I do not know where should I select the cpu. Is the '--with-cpu' at > glibc-2.8-20080929/configure? > > > Thanks, > Wu > LFS is a 32bit project, you need CLFS instead. Regards Phill -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Reason for Chapter 5
Scott wrote: > On Wed, Feb 04, 2009 at 04:11:26PM -0800, Rob Thornton wrote: > >> GCC is used to build software. Correct. So, any software you compile on >> your own system will work just fine. However, you are in essence, >> compiling software on YOUR system (host) for ANOTHER system (target). >> When compiling software with the host's gcc, that software will be >> linked against the host's libraries. This pollutes the toolchain because >> many of these links are hard-wired and can't be changed. So, when you >> remove the host and move into the chroot'd environment or try to boot >> the new system, you will run into all kinds of issues. >> > > Yes, but the OP asks the interesting question: What if the host system > is, say, lfs 6.1 and you want to build 6.4. Can Chapter 5 be skipped, > and if not, then why not? > > scott swanson > I guess mileage may vary on this. GCC is built against Glibc which is built against the kernel headers for the target, assuming your system update is using new headers and glibc versions you may face various compile and runtime issues with the resulting binaries if no sanitised platform was used because of the likely dependence on instructions from original code which compiled against libraries no longer in use. So based on my guess you'd have to do a fair bit of a build to work out if it was going to go OK or not, based on the wasted time for the 'not' scenario, its probably just easier to build a clean toolchain to work from and remove the hassle. Of course, I could be way off, in which case please share your thoughts, I'm always up for grasping things better too. Regards Phill -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: LFS 6.4 Portability - *** correction ***
*** Move this disk back to Machine A (not B as in the original post) *** >> Ubuntu boots ok >> > You probably need to recompile the kernel to include the correct driver > for your controller in machine A. > In the 2.6.27 kernel series this should be included under the following > menu: > > Device Drivers ---> Serial ATA (prod) and Parallel ATA (experimental) drivers > > Regards, > Ag. > As for why ubuntu boots but LFS doesn't, it related to having initrd/initramfs (i've no idea which ubuntu uses), Ubuntu will be using a modular kernel with all the required boot modules stored in the ramdisk, thus the i/o controller drivers are available when the kernel needs them. Because you built a custom kernel for LFS without a ramdisk, you had to compile the drivers into the kernel. The previous reply is still what you need to do to fix it, but I thought I'd try and shed some light on why it happened for you. Regards Phill -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Fwd: How to save and replicate a LFS
Anthony Price wrote: > Jian Yang wrote: > >> I have successfully created a LFS on one machine. >> >> Now I want to replicate it to other machines with same configuration. >> >> What is a good way to do that ? >> >> I use dd to dump/restore the disk partition. Any other better way? >> >> Thanks >> >> -yangjian >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > This worked for me: > > From the root of the LFS system > > cp -av * [target] > > Where the target is any area of storage such as another disk partition. > To make the new system bootable: > > 1. Edit /etc/fstab to indicate the new partition > 2. Edit GRUB to point to the new installation > > I have done this both as a partition to partition copy job and as a copy > to tarball and restore tarball to target partition and both have worked. > > HTH. > > Anthony. > > > > > Don't forget if moving to another machine you'll need to install grub as well as configure it, also, unless your machines are identical, you'll probably need to reconfigure the kernel to match the new machines too, most importantly the disk controller to make sure it can boot, obviously don't forget your network/audio cards and any other hardware when recompiling. For more tips have a search of the mailing list archives, this one has been covered a few times now. Regards Phill Upson -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Package User package management
Mike McCarty wrote: > I've been at the end of Chapter 5 pondering package management, > and have finally decided to give the package user method a try. > I don't like overburdening /etc/passwd with a lot of junk entries, > but then the benefits look pretty good. In fact, it looks like > a good idea even if another package manager is used to manage > the installs and database entry. > > One slightly confusing point, though, is why the package management > tools don't get installed using the package user philosophy. Why > aren't the tools themselves installed into the chroot environment > using the temporary tools in /tools? ISTM that the first package > to get installed should be package-user, not linux-libc-headers. > > Is there some reason that isn't done, that I've overlooked? > > Mike > Chapter was just the temporary system, you begin packaging everything in chapter 6 if you want package management. Only thing I don't like about the create user accounts method is exactly what you state, if /etc/passwd gets too full, running your eye over it to ensure nothing new and suspicious has cropped up becomes much harder. Just my 2 cents :) Phill -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Package User package management
Mike McCarty wrote: > That's what I'm asking about. I guess I wasn't clear. I don't understand > why the first package installed in Chapter 6, per the Hint, is > libc-headers instead of the package manager. ISTM that the first > package installed in the "real" system, that is the chroot environment, > should be whatever package manager is being used, and it should be > installed using itself. > > Almost, you need to install your package manager at the end of chapter 5 rather than start of 6, because then you have the package manager built as part of the toolchain, ready for use in the final system construction. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Package User package management
Mike McCarty wrote: > That's what I mentioned in the first message, which I didn't make > clear, I guess. In between Chapters 5 and 6, one would > build & install in /tools a temporary copy of the manager. Then, after > the initial setup in Chapter 6, the first package built & intalled > would be the package manager itself, using the temporary copy in > /tools to install the permanent version into the chroot environment, > that is, into what will eventually be the permanent system. > > Mike > I see your thinking, but in theory (following the dependency tracking malarky) you can't install the package manager first in chapter 6, because the package manager would have dependencies of its own which must be satisfied in order to install the package manager (yep, its a headache). So: Chapter 5, build entire toolchain End of chapter 5, build deps for package manager and then the package manager itself Chapter 6, build packages of each section, in the order they appear in the book, then install each package after you've built it As for when you build the package manager for the final system, you could do this at any point in chapter 6 where the deps of the package manager have been satisfied, however, as you still have access to the one in the toolchain, I'd see no advantage of working out when its best to do this, I'd just finished chapter 6 and then build my package manager. Hope thats clearer, I was a tad sleepy when writing my previous messages, so apologies for that. Phill -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: problem with chapter 6
Giuseppe Saponaro wrote: > Hi guys, > > I'm new to this mailing list and to LFS. Excuse me for something > wrong during the post. > > I have problem with chapter 6, point 7. Seems GCC is bad linked. > I read post with similar problem but i suppose I've a singular problem. > > I finish chapter 5 with one host distro. Sfortunately I broke my host > distro and I continued with chapter 6 with a new host distro. > > My question is: Can I continue my LFS ditro with these new host distro > ? Or there is something missing ? I suppose lfs user is not requested > from now on... If you broke your host distro, I'd guess you failed to setup the build environment correctly in which case no, you can't continue lfs where you left off because the build hasn't gone right. If you setup the lfs user and symlink correctly for chapter 5, then chroot correctly for chapter 6, you shouldn't actually have permission to break your host distro at all. If unsure then I (like James) would recommend you use the lfs livecd, at least it's read only so you physically can't break the host then :) Phill -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Help
Sam Vivacqua wrote: > The problem is that when I type the comand In -sv $LFS/tools / I > get the output: -bash: In: comand not found > > On Sat, Sep 12, 2009 at 11:01 PM, Chris Staub <mailto:ch...@beaker67.com>> wrote: > > On 09/12/2009 02:26 PM, Sam Vivacqua wrote: > > > > Hi, > > For the comand ln -sv $LFS/tools /in chapter 4.2, > Creating the > > $LFS/tools Directory, you said there are a few variations, but I > > cannot figure out which one to use. Can you tell me which > will work > > and the code that I will need to type? > > Thanks! > > > > > > I'm not sure what you mean. The command given in the book should work > fine. What's the problem? > -- > http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support > FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html > Unsubscribe: See the above information pa > The command is ln as in LN for link. Some familiarity with linux is assumed, as noted in the recommended reading section, also, copy and paste might not be a bad idea, especially for the seds and longer winded commands in the book. Phill -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Asus EeePC Laptop
Mike McCarty wrote: > Adrian Fisher wrote: > >> I noticed the wget package which is something I suppose :P I plan to >> wipe the entire drive so I will have the full 40GB to play with (I >> believe it is split over 2 drives, 8GB and 32GB which should be fine). >> I don't really like the interface that comes with it but that is not the >> reason I bought it. I bought it with the intention of wiping it and >> putting my own system on there. >> > > You might consider using three (at least) partitions. Two of them > can be small (like 5GB). One of those is the "current active" LFS, > the other for "in progress" LFS. The third, larger, is /home for > the data areas for users etc. > > You might want also a /boot, though that isn't necessary. It does > help with GRUB a little bit. That way you have a place to put your > kernel images, when doing the install. It also makes it easier to > edit the GRUB configuration and menu files. > > Mike > What about creating some space on another machine on your network and mounting it? You can keep all the sources off the eee and make best use of space then. Phill -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
[lfs-support] IPRoute2
I just tried to download from: https://devresources.linuxfoundation.org/dev/iproute2/download/iproute2-2.6.39.tar.gz and got a 404 - Not Found Any suggestions where I can download an IPRoute2 tarball? -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [lfs-support] IPRoute2
On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 7:44 PM, Andrew Benton - b3n...@gmail.com <+lfs-support+neophyte_rep+d15b1e2654.b3nton#gmail@spamgourmet.com> wrote: > On Sat, 31 Dec 2011 17:14:14 -0800 > lfs-support.neophyte_...@ordinaryamerican.net wrote: > >> I just tried to download from: >> https://devresources.linuxfoundation.org/dev/iproute2/download/iproute2-2.6.39.tar.gz >> and got a 404 - Not Found >> Any suggestions where I can download an IPRoute2 tarball? > > http://anduin.linuxfromscratch.org/sources/LFS/lfs-packages/7.0/ > > Should have everything > > Andy > -- > http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support > FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html > Unsubscribe: See the above information page > Ah, so there is a Plan B. Thank you. -- 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, Uthayanan has invited you to open a Gmail account
Thanks, but No, thanks. I imagine this was issued by accident. In which case, I'll just ignore it. If not, I think you have a something to learn about the appropriateness of posting such things to a mailing list. This type of posting is off topic. That is, no one expects to get such a posting, because everyone expects, as a matter of proper netiquette, that no one else will make such a posting. Finger slips are OK. We are, after all, all human. Right? On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 3:27 AM, Uthayanan - suthaya...@gmail.com wrote: > I've been using Gmail and thought you might like to try it out. Here's an > invitation to create an account. > -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
[lfs-support] TLDP LFS Guide
I've started trying to use LFS 7.4. As usual with these things, I took a tangent and went looking for Internet references outside of www.LinuxFromScratch.org. Does anyone within the LFS project maintain The Linux Documentation Project LFS Guide, http://www.tldp.org/guides.html#lfs or is that done by someone attached to TLDP? TLDP's information is out-of-date. It refers to version 6.1.1. TIA, NeoPhyte_Rep -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
