[lfs-support] Building Python3

[Baho Utot]

A note should be placed in the book about --with-ensurepip=yes.

It will not build pip, setuptools and wheel if they are already 
installed on the system.


Rebuilding python3 will not rebuild pip, setuptools and wheel as it 
detects that they are already installed on the system.


Even if they are older than the package currently being built.

./configure --prefix=/usr \
    --enable-shared \
    --with-system-expat \
    --with-system-ffi \
    --with-ensurepip=yes

--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

[lfs-support] Protected build environment

[baho-utot]

I created a way to make a "build area" using the overlayfs that is in 
the linux kernel environment so you can build LFS/BLFS that completely 
protects your host system from the building process.


I have placed it on github if you would like to have a gander at it

https://github.com/baho-utot/Overlay

to use it change directory to some place to your liking, I use /usr/src

    cd /usr/src

    git clone https://github.com/baho-utot/Overlay.git

    cd Overlay

    make

    make chroot

    you are now in the protected "jail"

You then have a clone of your host system less the /home directory

    I then cd to /usr/src and git clone my LFS build system there and 
run it.


I am using Raspian as my host system and while I am in the protected 
"jail" can installed software using apt.  The installed only is 
installed to the protected "jail" and doesn't affect the your host system


--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

Re: [lfs-support] LFS-8.4 swapfile

[Baho Utot]

On 7/26/19 6:21 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:

On 7/26/19 5:03 PM, Baho Utot wrote:


On 7/26/19 5:49 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:

On 7/26/19 4:15 PM, Baho Utot wrote:

Why is swap enabled so early in the boot process?

If you are using LFS on a raspberry pi you must do the following:

mv /etc/rc.d/rcS.d/S20swap /etc/rc.d/rcS.d/S60swap

otherwise the system comes up with no swap.

After making the change swap will come up upon boot.


Doing  'mount -a' after the system comes up will result in swap 
working


I don't see where it would affect other platforms as I have LFS 
running on x86_64, i386 and raspberry pi {1,2,3} ( soon to be pi4).


Historically you would want to mount swap before you mount / 
read-write.  In today's environment, you probably don't need swap at 
all.


What type of error do you get when trying to mount swap on the rpi?
That said, you may have a timing issue with the HW, but I'm just 
guessing.


The swap doesn't come up, I am using a swapfile so I believe that 
root will need to be mounted rw before swap can be enabled.


Hmm.  I've never run across anyone using a swapfile for the primary 
swap before.  Your solution seems to be good for your rare 
configuration. You could also create something like S99local to run 
'swapon -a'.


  -- Bruce



Well when you only have 512MB of ram (raspberry pi) you will need swap.  
Swapfile is easy to setup and doesn't require a partition.


I would propose moving S20swap to S60swap in the book as it will not 
affect most systems.



--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

Re: [lfs-support] LFS-8.4 swapfile

[Baho Utot]

On 7/26/19 5:49 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:

On 7/26/19 4:15 PM, Baho Utot wrote:

Why is swap enabled so early in the boot process?

If you are using LFS on a raspberry pi you must do the following:

mv /etc/rc.d/rcS.d/S20swap /etc/rc.d/rcS.d/S60swap

otherwise the system comes up with no swap.

After making the change swap will come up upon boot.


Doing  'mount -a' after the system comes up will result in swap working

I don't see where it would affect other platforms as I have LFS 
running on x86_64, i386 and raspberry pi {1,2,3} ( soon to be pi4).


Historically you would want to mount swap before you mount / 
read-write.  In today's environment, you probably don't need swap at all.


What type of error do you get when trying to mount swap on the rpi?
That said, you may have a timing issue with the HW, but I'm just 
guessing.


  -- Bruce

The swap doesn't come up, I am using a swapfile so I believe that root 
will need to be mounted rw before swap can be enabled.



--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

[lfs-support] LFS-8.4 swapfile

[Baho Utot]

Why is swap enabled so early in the boot process?

If you are using LFS on a raspberry pi you must do the following:

mv /etc/rc.d/rcS.d/S20swap /etc/rc.d/rcS.d/S60swap

otherwise the system comes up with no swap.

After making the change swap will come up upon boot.


Doing  'mount -a' after the system comes up will result in swap working

I don't see where it would affect other platforms as I have LFS running 
on x86_64, i386 and raspberry pi {1,2,3} ( soon to be pi4).





--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

Re: [lfs-support] RaspberryPi

[Baho Utot]

On 5/26/19 5:26 PM, Don Cross wrote:
On Sun, May 26, 2019 at 5:22 PM Baho Utot <mailto:baho-u...@columbus.rr.com>> wrote:


I am currently working to get LFS to build on RaspberryPi 2 and 3.

I use them on my network to handle email, DNS, DHCP and file
serving.  I
also have git repositories hosted on raspberry pis.

Is there any interest in this?

Maybe a book on this?

I am working on chapter 5 and look to complete that by the end of
the month.


Have you seen PiLFS?  I have used it to complete an LFS build on 
Raspberry Pi 3. It will help you with certain peculiarities of the Pi 
architecture that are not obvious at all, especially the way it boots.


https://intestinate.com/pilfs/





Yes I am using that as a guide

There is an issue with the way it builds as the /tools/etc directory is 
being used upon building some packages. Even though it is not present in 
the current filesystem/PATH.



-- 
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

[lfs-support] RaspberryPi

[Baho Utot]

I am currently working to get LFS to build on RaspberryPi 2 and 3.

I use them on my network to handle email, DNS, DHCP and file serving.  I 
also have git repositories hosted on raspberry pis.


Is there any interest in this?

Maybe a book on this?

I am working on chapter 5 and look to complete that by the end of the month.

--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

[lfs-support] download location for openssl-1.1.1a

[Baho Utot]

The location for this package has changed to:

https://www.openssl.org/source/old/1.1.1/openssl-1.1.1a.tar.gz

--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

[lfs-support] LFS-8.4 openssl download location

[Baho Utot]

The location for this package has changed to:

https://www.openssl.org/source/old/1.1.1/openssl-1.1.1a.tar.gz

--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

[lfs-support] LFS-8.4 openssl download location

[Baho Utot]

The location for this package has changed to:

https://www.openssl.org/source/old/1.1.1/openssl-1.1.1a.tar.gz

--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

Re: [lfs-support] Cannot build elfutils

[Baho utot]

On 5/10/19 5:25 PM, Niels Terp wrote:


Hey, I’m kind of new here. I build LFS several times a few years ago, 
but then got busy with other things.


Now I’m back, I’m following current stable lfs, and here is my first 
problem:


I have a script that builds the  temporary system. Since i want to 
install RPM, I continue with the deps of RPM, among wich is elfutils.


It is set up like chapter 6.48.1 with ./configure –prefix=/tools 
–program-prefix=”eu-”


When I run ”make” I get these errors:

  CC   dwarf_next_lines.os

  AR   libdw.a

  AR   libdw_pic.a

  CCLD libdw.so

/mnt/lfs/tools/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/8.2.0/../../../../x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ld: 
/mnt/lfs/tools/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/8.2.0/../../../../lib64/libbz2.a(bzlib.o): 
relocation R_X86_64_32S against symbol `BZ2_crc32Table' can not be 
used when making a shared object; recompile with -fPIC


/mnt/lfs/tools/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/8.2.0/../../../../x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ld: 
/mnt/lfs/tools/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/8.2.0/../../../../lib64/libbz2.a(compress.o): 
relocation R_X86_64_32 against `.rodata.str1.1' can not be used when 
making a shared object; recompile with -fPIC


/mnt/lfs/tools/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/8.2.0/../../../../x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ld: 
/mnt/lfs/tools/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/8.2.0/../../../../lib64/libbz2.a(decompress.o): 
relocation R_X86_64_32S against `.rodata' can not be used when making 
a shared object; recompile with -fPIC


/mnt/lfs/tools/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/8.2.0/../../../../x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ld: 
/mnt/lfs/tools/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/8.2.0/../../../../lib64/libbz2.a(blocksort.o): 
relocation R_X86_64_32 against `.rodata.str1.1' can not be used when 
making a shared object; recompile with -fPIC


/mnt/lfs/tools/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/8.2.0/../../../../x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ld: 
final link failed: nonrepresentable section on output


collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status

make[3]: *** [Makefile:1372: libdw.so] Error 1

make[2]: *** [Makefile:614: all] Error 2

make[1]: *** [Makefile:485: all-recursive] Error 1

make: *** [Makefile:401: all] Error 2

The full log file is enclosed.

I see that I have to recompile with -fPIC – but how do I do that ?



Bzip2 is the problem child, here this is a snippet from my build scripts 
(tools.sh) and it will "correct" your problem


set -o errexit    # exit if error...insurance ;)
set -o nounset    # exit if variable not initalized
set +h        # disable hashall
#    Common variables
PRGNAME=${0##*/}        # script name minus the path
TOPDIR=${PWD}            # this directory
PARENT=/usr/src/LFS-RPM        # build system master directory
LOGFILE=$(date +%Y-%m-%d).log    # Not Used
MKFLAGS="-j 1"            # Number of cpu to use in building pkgs 
default = 1

#    environment from lfs user
LFS=/mnt/lfs            # where the build will be
LC_ALL=POSIX
LFS_TGT=${HOSTTYPE}-lfs-linux-gnu
PATH=/tools/bin:/bin:/usr/bin
export LFS LC_ALL LFS_TGT PATH

function msg {
    printf "%s\n" "${1}"
    return
}

function msg_line {
    printf "%s" "${1}"
    return
}

function msg_success {
    local _green="\\033[1;32m"
    local _normal="\\033[0;39m"
    printf "${_green}%s${_normal}\n" "SUCCESS"
    return
}

function clean_build-directory {
    msg_line "Cleaning BUILD directory: "
        rm -rf ${TOPDIR}/BUILD/*
        rm -rf ${TOPDIR}/BUILDROOT/*
    msg_success
    return
}

function Bzip {
    #    Bzip2-1.0.6
    local pkg=bzip2-1.0.6.tar.gz
    local pkg_dir=${pkg%%.tar*}
    local logfile="${TOPDIR}/LOGS/tools-${FUNCNAME}.log"
    local OPTFLAGS=" -march=x86-64 -mtune=generic -O2 -pipe -fPIC "
    [ -e ${logfile}.complete ] && { msg "Skipping: ${FUNCNAME}";return 
0; } || msg "Building: ${FUNCNAME}"

    > ${logfile}
    pushd ${TOPDIR}/BUILD >> /dev/null 2>&1
        unpack "${pkg}"
        pushd ${pkg_dir} >> /dev/null 2>&1
            msg_line "    Configure: "
                sed -i "s|-O2|${OPTFLAGS}|g" Makefile
                sed -i "s|-O2|${OPTFLAGS}|g" Makefile-libbz2_so
            msg_success
            msg_line "     Make: "
                make ${MKFLAGS} >> ${logfile} 2>&1
            msg_success
            msg_line "      Install: "
                make PREFIX=/tools install >> ${logfile} 2>&1
            msg_success
        popd > /dev/null 2>&1
    popd > /dev/null 2>&1
    clean_build-directory
    mv ${logfile} ${logfile}.complete
    return
}
-- 
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

Re: [lfs-support] Cannot build elfutils

[Baho utot]

On 5/10/19 5:25 PM, Niels Terp wrote:


Hey, I’m kind of new here. I build LFS several times a few years ago, 
but then got busy with other things.


Now I’m back, I’m following current stable lfs, and here is my first 
problem:


I have a script that builds the  temporary system. Since i want to 
install RPM, I continue with the deps of RPM, among wich is elfutils.


It is set up like chapter 6.48.1 with ./configure –prefix=/tools 
–program-prefix=”eu-”


When I run ”make” I get these errors:

  CC   dwarf_next_lines.os

  AR   libdw.a

  AR   libdw_pic.a

  CCLD libdw.so

/mnt/lfs/tools/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/8.2.0/../../../../x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ld: 
/mnt/lfs/tools/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/8.2.0/../../../../lib64/libbz2.a(bzlib.o): 
relocation R_X86_64_32S against symbol `BZ2_crc32Table' can not be 
used when making a shared object; recompile with -fPIC


/mnt/lfs/tools/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/8.2.0/../../../../x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ld: 
/mnt/lfs/tools/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/8.2.0/../../../../lib64/libbz2.a(compress.o): 
relocation R_X86_64_32 against `.rodata.str1.1' can not be used when 
making a shared object; recompile with -fPIC


/mnt/lfs/tools/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/8.2.0/../../../../x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ld: 
/mnt/lfs/tools/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/8.2.0/../../../../lib64/libbz2.a(decompress.o): 
relocation R_X86_64_32S against `.rodata' can not be used when making 
a shared object; recompile with -fPIC


/mnt/lfs/tools/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/8.2.0/../../../../x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ld: 
/mnt/lfs/tools/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/8.2.0/../../../../lib64/libbz2.a(blocksort.o): 
relocation R_X86_64_32 against `.rodata.str1.1' can not be used when 
making a shared object; recompile with -fPIC


/mnt/lfs/tools/bin/../lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/8.2.0/../../../../x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ld: 
final link failed: nonrepresentable section on output


collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status

make[3]: *** [Makefile:1372: libdw.so] Error 1

make[2]: *** [Makefile:614: all] Error 2

make[1]: *** [Makefile:485: all-recursive] Error 1

make: *** [Makefile:401: all] Error 2

The full log file is enclosed.

I see that I have to recompile with -fPIC – but how do I do that ?

Hope you can help me with this ?

Cheers

Niels




Welcome back Niels,  I still have my github repos.  You may want to have 
a look at them.  I am almost finished with the LFS-8.4 build system.


I need to have it build itself and I need to fix the rpm installers 
script.  The build procedure should be correct, just need to validate.


Look at my tools.sh script, it builds elfutils libraries which is all 
you need to build rpm.


https://github.com/baho-utot/LFS-RPM

If you like we can work this together.



-- 
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

Re: [lfs-support] LFS-8.4 Perl segfaults during build

[Baho utot]

On 5/9/19 2:40 AM, Ken Moffat wrote:

On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 09:47:40PM -0400, Baho utot wrote:

More info on segfaults:

built perl on pclinuxos saw no segfaults during the build

Opened the syslog and boom here it is:

May  8 21:41:16 desktop kernel: perl[16059]: segfault at 7ffeba075ff8 ip
7ff75122dd85 sp 7ffeba076000 error 6 in
Storable.so[7ff751223000+14000]
May  8 21:41:16 desktop kernel: perl[16066]: segfault at 7ffc0742bff8 ip
7fb95267653c sp 7ffc0742c000 error 6 in
Storable.so[7fb95266b000+14000]
May  8 21:41:16 desktop kernel: perl[16072]: segfault at 7ffd42292ff8 ip
7f09a4b851fc sp 7ffd42293000 error 6 in
Storable.so[7f09a4b7b000+14000]
May  8 21:41:17 desktop kernel: perl[16095]: segfault at 7fff15dbbff8 ip
7f09a780fa72 sp 7fff15dbc000 error 6 in
libperl.so[7f09a7761000+15d000]
May  8 21:41:17 desktop kernel: perl[16099]: segfault at 7ffde0594ff8 ip
7fd4ad18d1f2 sp 7ffde0594fe0 error 6 in
Storable.so[7fd4ad183000+14000]
May  8 21:41:17 desktop kernel: perl[16109]: segfault at 7ffed745ffc0 ip
7f5b83ac1ebd sp 7ffed745ffc0 error 6 in
ld-2.29.so[7f5b83ab9000+1e000]
May  8 21:41:17 desktop kernel: perl[16132]: segfault at 7fffb59a8fd8 ip
7f9972d4f3cb sp 7fffb59a8fd0 error 6 in
Storable.so[7f9972d43000+14000]
May  8 21:41:17 desktop kernel: perl[16172]: segfault at 7fffa7a92fe8 ip
7f0f722d11fe sp 7fffa7a92ff0 error 6 in
libc-2.29.so[7f0f7226d000+154000]
May  8 21:41:17 desktop kernel: perl[16174]: segfault at 7ffc911c7fc8 ip
7f1b3a047e4b sp 7ffc911c7fc0 error 6 in
libc-2.29.so[7f1b39fe5000+154000]
May  8 21:41:17 desktop kernel: perl[16181]: segfault at 7ffe790b9ff8 ip
7fcd75ed7e4b sp 7ffe790b9ff0 error 6 in
libc-2.29.so[7fcd75e75000+154000]

It looked like it built correctly from watching the build but if you don't
look in the syslog you will not know that they occured

Can some one have a look in their syslog after they just built perl to see
if it was clean?

I did the following:

tail -f /var/log/syslog

Yes it is syslog on pclinuxos and not sys.log


As it happens, I'm stuck in building current LFS-svn (failed sanity
check after installing gcc in chroot).  So, I've still got the
syslog from building perl in chapter 5, and yes, loads of segfaults
(but not as many as from the gcc tests).

So, presumably perl-5.26 is constructed differently from 5.26. Maybe
a side-effect of the work the perl maintainers put into fixing CVEs
last year.

And the reason why you saw these on the screen in LFS, but not in
pclinuxos is probably a matter of kernel/bootscript configuration:
For the LFS bootscripts, see section 7.6.5 'Configuring the Linux
Console' ('LOGLEVEL') : I'm using "4"

or for the kernel itself (this is from 5.0)
#
# printk and dmesg options
#
CONFIG_PRINTK_TIME=y
CONFIG_CONSOLE_LOGLEVEL_DEFAULT=7
CONFIG_CONSOLE_LOGLEVEL_QUIET=4
CONFIG_MESSAGE_LOGLEVEL_DEFAULT=4

Normally, if I look at the syslog after a build, it is at the end
and by that stage anything from chapter 5 is by definition not
interesting.

Summary: these segfaults fro mperl, and not just from running the
tests, turn out to be normal and can be configured out of the terms.
So, I was wrong in saying that they only came from failign tests.
Well, not the first time I've been wrong, I'm sure it will happen
again.

Hope the rest of it goes ok, and then when you hit problems in BLFS
please ask - but remember that not everyone has the same interests,
and very few people build exactly the same desktop packages.



I have also tried perl-5.28.2 same issue.

BLFS is a bit down the road,  want to get LFS-8.4 working oon a 
raspberry pi first



--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

Re: [lfs-support] LFS-8.4 Perl segfaults during build

[Baho utot]

On 5/9/19 12:47 AM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:

On 5/8/19 8:47 PM, Baho utot wrote:

More info on segfaults:

built perl on pclinuxos saw no segfaults during the build

Opened the syslog and boom here it is:

May  8 21:41:16 desktop kernel: perl[16059]: segfault at 7ffeba075ff8 
ip 7ff75122dd85 sp 7ffeba076000 error 6 in 
Storable.so[7ff751223000+14000]
May  8 21:41:16 desktop kernel: perl[16066]: segfault at 7ffc0742bff8 
ip 7fb95267653c sp 7ffc0742c000 error 6 in 
Storable.so[7fb95266b000+14000]
May  8 21:41:16 desktop kernel: perl[16072]: segfault at 7ffd42292ff8 
ip 7f09a4b851fc sp 7ffd42293000 error 6 in 
Storable.so[7f09a4b7b000+14000]
May  8 21:41:17 desktop kernel: perl[16095]: segfault at 7fff15dbbff8 
ip 7f09a780fa72 sp 7fff15dbc000 error 6 in 
libperl.so[7f09a7761000+15d000]
May  8 21:41:17 desktop kernel: perl[16099]: segfault at 7ffde0594ff8 
ip 7fd4ad18d1f2 sp 7ffde0594fe0 error 6 in 
Storable.so[7fd4ad183000+14000]
May  8 21:41:17 desktop kernel: perl[16109]: segfault at 7ffed745ffc0 
ip 7f5b83ac1ebd sp 7ffed745ffc0 error 6 in 
ld-2.29.so[7f5b83ab9000+1e000]
May  8 21:41:17 desktop kernel: perl[16132]: segfault at 7fffb59a8fd8 
ip 7f9972d4f3cb sp 7fffb59a8fd0 error 6 in 
Storable.so[7f9972d43000+14000]
May  8 21:41:17 desktop kernel: perl[16172]: segfault at 7fffa7a92fe8 
ip 7f0f722d11fe sp 7fffa7a92ff0 error 6 in 
libc-2.29.so[7f0f7226d000+154000]
May  8 21:41:17 desktop kernel: perl[16174]: segfault at 7ffc911c7fc8 
ip 7f1b3a047e4b sp 7ffc911c7fc0 error 6 in 
libc-2.29.so[7f1b39fe5000+154000]
May  8 21:41:17 desktop kernel: perl[16181]: segfault at 7ffe790b9ff8 
ip 7fcd75ed7e4b sp 7ffe790b9ff0 error 6 in 
libc-2.29.so[7fcd75e75000+154000]


It looked like it built correctly from watching the build but if you 
don't look in the syslog you will not know that they occured


Can some one have a look in their syslog after they just built perl 
to see if it was clean?


I did the following:

tail -f /var/log/syslog

Yes it is syslog on pclinuxos and not sys.log


I did a test build and did get those segfaults in my log.  There were 
10 instances over about 0.3 seconds.


Mine look a little different.  The log entries are in pairs. For 
example (formatted):


May  8 15:43:37 frodo84 kernel: [4311687.668999] perl[23266]:
segfault at 7ffe87508ff8
ip 004e5012
sp 7ffe87509000 error 6 in perl[407000+22c000]

May  8 15:43:37 frodo84 kernel: [4311687.669009]
Code: 00 b8 04 69 64 00 48 0f 45 d0 89 ee bf 20 56 67 00 31 c0 e8 30
  63 09 00 ba 16 87 c9 00 eb eb 66 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 00 41 56
  <41> 55 41 54 49 89 f4 55 48 89 fd 53 48 83 ec 20 4c 8b 6f 08
  64 48

I did not do an install for this test.  It does not happen in the 
Configure command so something in one of the Makefiles is causing it, 
but I can't find a reference in the log.


  -- Bruce




From what I can tell it comes from Storable.so when it is built, don't 
know what is causing it


--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

Re: [lfs-support] LFS-8.4 Perl segfaults during build

[Baho utot]

On 5/9/19 4:55 AM, Michael Shell wrote:

ulimit -n 1024 -u 35 -m 20 -d unlimited -s 8192 -c 20 -v 2000



Tried that and it did not work,  I think that fixed a different issue

--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

Re: [lfs-support] LFS-8.4 Perl segfaults during build

[Baho utot]

More info on segfaults:

built perl on pclinuxos saw no segfaults during the build

Opened the syslog and boom here it is:

May  8 21:41:16 desktop kernel: perl[16059]: segfault at 7ffeba075ff8 ip 
7ff75122dd85 sp 7ffeba076000 error 6 in 
Storable.so[7ff751223000+14000]
May  8 21:41:16 desktop kernel: perl[16066]: segfault at 7ffc0742bff8 ip 
7fb95267653c sp 7ffc0742c000 error 6 in 
Storable.so[7fb95266b000+14000]
May  8 21:41:16 desktop kernel: perl[16072]: segfault at 7ffd42292ff8 ip 
7f09a4b851fc sp 7ffd42293000 error 6 in 
Storable.so[7f09a4b7b000+14000]
May  8 21:41:17 desktop kernel: perl[16095]: segfault at 7fff15dbbff8 ip 
7f09a780fa72 sp 7fff15dbc000 error 6 in 
libperl.so[7f09a7761000+15d000]
May  8 21:41:17 desktop kernel: perl[16099]: segfault at 7ffde0594ff8 ip 
7fd4ad18d1f2 sp 7ffde0594fe0 error 6 in 
Storable.so[7fd4ad183000+14000]
May  8 21:41:17 desktop kernel: perl[16109]: segfault at 7ffed745ffc0 ip 
7f5b83ac1ebd sp 7ffed745ffc0 error 6 in 
ld-2.29.so[7f5b83ab9000+1e000]
May  8 21:41:17 desktop kernel: perl[16132]: segfault at 7fffb59a8fd8 ip 
7f9972d4f3cb sp 7fffb59a8fd0 error 6 in 
Storable.so[7f9972d43000+14000]
May  8 21:41:17 desktop kernel: perl[16172]: segfault at 7fffa7a92fe8 ip 
7f0f722d11fe sp 7fffa7a92ff0 error 6 in 
libc-2.29.so[7f0f7226d000+154000]
May  8 21:41:17 desktop kernel: perl[16174]: segfault at 7ffc911c7fc8 ip 
7f1b3a047e4b sp 7ffc911c7fc0 error 6 in 
libc-2.29.so[7f1b39fe5000+154000]
May  8 21:41:17 desktop kernel: perl[16181]: segfault at 7ffe790b9ff8 ip 
7fcd75ed7e4b sp 7ffe790b9ff0 error 6 in 
libc-2.29.so[7fcd75e75000+154000]


It looked like it built correctly from watching the build but if you 
don't look in the syslog you will not know that they occured


Can some one have a look in their syslog after they just built perl to 
see if it was clean?


I did the following:

tail -f /var/log/syslog

Yes it is syslog on pclinuxos and not sys.log

--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

Re: [lfs-support] LFS-8.4 Perl segfaults during build

[Baho utot]

On 5/8/19 3:49 PM, Ken Moffat wrote:

On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 11:46:40AM -0400, baho-u...@columbus.rr.com wrote:

I went back into my archive of LFS-8.2 and pulled out the perl-5.26.1.tar.xz
tarball and copied it into the build directory. Changed the script that I
use to build the chapter 5 tool chain to use that version and build the
package but not install it.  No segfault during the build.

Changed the script back to use perl-5.28.1 and the segfaults occur.

This points to something in the 5.28.1 version of perl causing the
segfaults.

Since I can not further debug this issue I may have to use the perl 5.26.1
version in my LFS-8.4 builds.

That is unless some one wants to help with this issue.

So, you are making some progress although it obviously does not feel
like that to you.

For the 5.26 series of perl, if my memory serves me well 5.26.3 has
a number of vulnerability fixes.

I also note that you said that using the pclinuxos *kernel* to run
LFS does not show the problem, which suggests a kernel-config
difference, or else a kernel-version difference.


No it does not segfault under pclinuxos as a host, only LFS.

I used the config file from pclinuxos which was 4.16.12 and did a make 
oldconfig then added the SATA drivers so it would boot.  It still 
segfaulted when building on LFS-8.4.   This is a perl or LFS issue as it 
will build under pclinuxos and arch linux.


I would say it could be an issue with my build but all tests pass and 
gcc tests are clean.


 The system runs fine, the version of perl in LFS-8.4 always segfaults 
under a LFS host.


Using the perl version from LFS-8.2 works fine under a LFS host.

It is my opinion that it is a LFS build/system issue.

Has any one else tried to build LFS-8.4 using the just build LFS-8.4?




ĸen

--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

Re: [lfs-support] LFS-8.4 Perl segfaults during build

[baho-utot]

On 5/8/19 10:08 AM, Pierre Labastie wrote:
Hey, why are you turning angry? People on this list are willing to 
help, but

they are not Harry Potter, and cannot fly to your machine to see what is going
on... They all told you they had not seen what you were seeing. This does not
mean you did something wrong, but it means they can only give general advice
about how to fix the issue. They can't experiment with this issue, since they
do not experience it... You may have hit a corner case that nobody of us has
hit before. Does it mean we deserve angry words?

Pierre


Grab my scripts/build system off github if you want to try my build.

This is not the first time that I have been told on this list that I am 
on my own.


I reported a problem.  The issue comes from using LFS to build itself, 
the build on the host system always works.


Here is the process:

build LFS on pclinuxos, working.

boot to the newly build LFS system

Use the same scripts and build LFS using the just built LFS. This has 
perl segfaulting.


Change the perl to version 5.26.1. This works.

Does any one here use LFS to build itself? How would you validate that 
the "system works" if you didn't.  It must be able to reproduce it self.


How else you you know that the LFS build process works correctly.

You can only know if it can rebuild it self.

That tells you that it built correctly and is working.


--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

Re: [lfs-support] LFS-8.4 Perl segfaults during build

[baho-utot]

I went back into my archive of LFS-8.2 and pulled out the 
perl-5.26.1.tar.xz tarball and copied it into the build directory. 
Changed the script that I use to build the chapter 5 tool chain to use 
that version and build the package but not install it.  No segfault 
during the build.


Changed the script back to use perl-5.28.1 and the segfaults occur.

This points to something in the 5.28.1 version of perl causing the 
segfaults.


Since I can not further debug this issue I may have to use the perl 
5.26.1 version in my LFS-8.4 builds.


That is unless some one wants to help with this issue.
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

Re: [lfs-support] LFS-8.4 Perl segfaults during build

[baho-utot]

On 5/7/19 9:04 PM, Ken Moffat wrote:

On Tue, May 07, 2019 at 05:50:28PM -0400, baho-u...@columbus.rr.com wrote:

I have built a different kernel using pclinuxos config file.

The segfaults only occur when building perl under LFS-8.4.  It does not stop
or invalidate the build and the segfault error messages only go to the
screen and to /var/log/sys.log.

Here is some more info, if some one can decipher:

May  7 17:24:23 lfs kernel: perl[5349]: segfault at 7fff0fb57ff8 ip
0048ceb9 sp 7fff0fb58000 error 6 in perl[407000+23]
May  7 17:24:23 lfs kernel: perl[5351]: segfault at 7ffc09fc7ff8 ip
0048bbbf sp 7ffc09fc7fe0 error 6 in perl[407000+23]
May  7 17:24:23 lfs kernel: perl[5357]: segfault at 7fff3f7a0ff8 ip
0048bba6 sp 7fff3f7a1000 error 6 in perl[407000+23]
May  7 17:24:23 lfs kernel: perl[5359]: segfault at 7ffcbf3d2ff8 ip
005a8bc4 sp 7ffcbf3d3000 error 6 in perl[407000+23]
May  7 17:24:23 lfs kernel: perl[5365]: segfault at 7fff61303ff8 ip
005a8bc4 sp 7fff61304000 error 6 in perl[407000+23]
May  7 17:24:23 lfs kernel: perl[5375]: segfault at 7ffe31a01ff8 ip
0048c722 sp 7ffe31a02000 error 6 in perl[407000+23]
May  7 17:24:23 lfs kernel: perl[5377]: segfault at 7ffc7703efe8 ip
0048bbc9 sp 7ffc7703eff0 error 6 in perl[407000+23]
May  7 17:24:23 lfs kernel: perl[5379]: segfault at 7ffd67853ff8 ip
0048ceb6 sp 7ffd67854000 error 6 in perl[407000+23]
May  7 17:24:23 lfs kernel: perl[5385]: segfault at 7ffcff30dfa8 ip
0048dc3d sp 7ffcff30dfa0 error 6 in perl[407000+23]
May  7 17:24:24 lfs kernel: perl[5389]: segfault at 7ffe0db99ff8 ip
7f8f708f1332 sp 7ffe0db9a000 error 6 in
libc-2.29.so[7f8f70892000+142000]


I don't use gdb, but I think that using it would, at a minimum, mean
you need to know what command was being run.  These segfaults all
happened within about 1 second, but we have no indication of when the
various stages of the build happened, so no idea what this might have
been doing.

Nothing odd in the perl logs ? (e.g. different results for tests in
configure between the two kernels, different actions in the build,
probably best identified by opening two term windows side-by-side on
a system where X is working).


I can not run two term windows side by side.  I have never been able to 
complete LFS because I could never get it to work sufficently to replace 
my current desktop system.  I have been building LFS off an on since 
LFS-5.0 and maintain a repo. on github.




I will also mention that segfaults are not necessarily a bad thing -
see my experience with rustc, where system crashes (possibly, caused
by an -rc kernel) seemed to be associated with segfaults in the
syslog, and it was *much* later before I discovered that they were
actually intentional (a way to force something to die).  Similarly
for some of the tests in perl's testsuite.

But since using a distro kernel apparently removed the problem, I
would be inclined to look at both the .config changes (both the
built-in items, and also whatever was loaded when you finished the
perl build) and also at the kernel versions (and theoretically any
non-upstream patches in the distro, if any).  But comparing the
kernels sounds a *lot* of work, with not much likelihood of a
result.  Ultimately, this might come down to : Your system ... your
problem :-(


Which is why I have never been able to actually use a LFS system.  
Problems that I have had with LFS could not be solved or you could say I 
have never gotten much help trying to solve these issues on this mailing 
list.




And for unexplained segfaults, memtest86 might also be useful - I
bought my main build machine about 3 years ago, up until Easter it
was running fine and then suddenly I started getting segfaults
building large programs (rustc, qt or qtwebengine) - I had 16GB RAM,
everything small still built fine).  Running memtest86 showed a
problem within 1 minute, one of the sticks had a problem.  Usually,
memtest86 takes a bit longer than that.  In that case, it still ran
after pulling one stick, and passed memtest.  It's now running ok
with a new stick.



I would not expect it is my system as it builds without the segfaults 
under pclinuxos, it just fails while rebuilding its self.  Whne building 
under pclinuox the system is under heavy usage runing kde5 while 
building LFS.  I even have vlc and firefox open as well as 6 other 
windows and it uses most of the available memory.



I am going to use/build an older perl to see if it segfaults.  If it 
does I am probably  finished 
with LFS at this point.  No more time for all the work with little to no 
result. I have thought about rebuilding LFS-8.2 which worked but at this 
point it is not worth the effort.



-- 
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above 

Re: [lfs-support] LFS-8.4 Perl segfaults during build

[baho-utot]

I have built a different kernel using pclinuxos config file.

The segfaults only occur when building perl under LFS-8.4.  It does not 
stop or invalidate the build and the segfault error messages only go to 
the screen and to /var/log/sys.log.


Here is some more info, if some one can decipher:

May  7 17:24:23 lfs kernel: perl[5349]: segfault at 7fff0fb57ff8 ip 
0048ceb9 sp 7fff0fb58000 error 6 in perl[407000+23]
May  7 17:24:23 lfs kernel: perl[5351]: segfault at 7ffc09fc7ff8 ip 
0048bbbf sp 7ffc09fc7fe0 error 6 in perl[407000+23]
May  7 17:24:23 lfs kernel: perl[5357]: segfault at 7fff3f7a0ff8 ip 
0048bba6 sp 7fff3f7a1000 error 6 in perl[407000+23]
May  7 17:24:23 lfs kernel: perl[5359]: segfault at 7ffcbf3d2ff8 ip 
005a8bc4 sp 7ffcbf3d3000 error 6 in perl[407000+23]
May  7 17:24:23 lfs kernel: perl[5365]: segfault at 7fff61303ff8 ip 
005a8bc4 sp 7fff61304000 error 6 in perl[407000+23]
May  7 17:24:23 lfs kernel: perl[5375]: segfault at 7ffe31a01ff8 ip 
0048c722 sp 7ffe31a02000 error 6 in perl[407000+23]
May  7 17:24:23 lfs kernel: perl[5377]: segfault at 7ffc7703efe8 ip 
0048bbc9 sp 7ffc7703eff0 error 6 in perl[407000+23]
May  7 17:24:23 lfs kernel: perl[5379]: segfault at 7ffd67853ff8 ip 
0048ceb6 sp 7ffd67854000 error 6 in perl[407000+23]
May  7 17:24:23 lfs kernel: perl[5385]: segfault at 7ffcff30dfa8 ip 
0048dc3d sp 7ffcff30dfa0 error 6 in perl[407000+23]
May  7 17:24:24 lfs kernel: perl[5389]: segfault at 7ffe0db99ff8 ip 
7f8f708f1332 sp 7ffe0db9a000 error 6 in 
libc-2.29.so[7f8f70892000+142000]



--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

Re: [lfs-support] LFS-8.4 Perl segfaults during build

[baho-utot]

On 5/7/19 1:48 PM, Ken Moffat wrote:

On Tue, May 07, 2019 at 08:24:11AM -0400, baho-u...@columbus.rr.com wrote:

Building perl ( both chapter 5 and 6 ) under the host system (pclinuxos)
works fine.

The issue is when I use the newly built LFS-8.4 to build its self ie as the
host system.

The perl build for both chapter 5 and chapter 6 produces some segfaults
outputs to stderr.

The build always completes and I when boot to this new build (lfs as the
host) and it works.


 From what you say, you have not captured stderr along with stdout
(i.e. 2>&1) and therefore you cannot say what the build was doing at
the time ?



Yes it was not captured


function Perl {
    #    Perl-5.28.1
    local pkg=perl-5.28.1.tar.xz
    local pkg_dir=${pkg%%.tar*}
    local logfile="${TOPDIR}/LOGS/tools-${FUNCNAME}.log"
    [ -e ${logfile}.complete ] && { msg "Skipping: ${FUNCNAME}";return 
0; } || msg "Building: ${FUNCNAME}"

    > ${logfile}
    pushd ${TOPDIR}/BUILD >> /dev/null 2>&1
        unpack "${pkg}"
        pushd ${pkg_dir} >> /dev/null 2>&1
            msg_line "    Configure: "
                sh Configure -des -Dprefix=/tools -Dlibs=-lm 
-Uloclibpth -Ulocincpth >> ${logfile} 2>&1

            msg_success
            msg_line "     Make: "
                make ${MKFLAGS} >> ${logfile} 2>&1
            msg_success
            msg_line "      Install: "
                cp -v perl cpan/podlators/scripts/pod2man /tools/bin >> 
${logfile} 2>&1

                mkdir -pv /tools/lib/perl5/5.28.1 >> ${logfile} 2>&1
                cp -Rv lib/* /tools/lib/perl5/5.28.1 >> ${logfile} 2>&1
            msg_success
        popd > /dev/null 2>&1
    popd > /dev/null 2>&1
    clean_build-directory
    mv ${logfile} ${logfile}.complete
    return
}




I've looked at screens where perl was building (with stdout and
stderr diverted to a log) several times in recent months - mainly
when the perl tests are running - and not seen this, nor is there
any sign of it in my build logs.

What I have seen are segmentation faults in my _system_ log.  I
think these are during the tests, and are expected.  But obviously
that doesn't apply to chapter 5.  Oh, and for the tests it is
obviously impractical to know which was running at the time (no
regular output until all tests have run).


I have not looked at the system log to see if the segfaults are there.

I have since built it using the host kernel and initrd image and it does 
not segfault.



I am going to build the kernel using the pclinuxos config file after I 
change it to add the SATA drivers as they are modules in their config file.






ĸen

--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

[lfs-support] LFS-8.4 Perl segfaults during build

[baho-utot]

Building perl ( both chapter 5 and 6 ) under the host system (pclinuxos) 
works fine.


The issue is when I use the newly built LFS-8.4 to build its self ie as 
the host system.


The perl build for both chapter 5 and chapter 6 produces some segfaults 
outputs to stderr.


The build always completes and I when boot to this new build (lfs as the 
host) and it works.


The last LFS ( version 8.2 ) I built does not do this when using it to 
"rebuild its self".


Has anyone seen this?


--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

[lfs-support] LFS-8.4 6.34. Bash-5.0

[baho-utot]

Missing from the install instructions:

ln -vs bash /bin/sh




--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

Re: [lfs-support] LFS-8.4 SEARCH_DIR

[baho-utot]

On 3/17/19 5:42 PM, Pierre Labastie wrote:

On 17/03/2019 21:48, baho-u...@columbus.rr.com wrote:

Trying to figure this out.


 6.10. Adjusting the Toolchain

The step the results in

grep 'SEARCH.*/usr/lib' dummy.log |sed 's|; |\n|g'
SEARCH_DIR("=/tools/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib64") |SEARCH_DIR("/usr/lib")
SEARCH_DIR("/lib")|
SEARCH_DIR("=/tools/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib")

Notice the = in front of the first and last entries.  I know they should be
ignored but what is causing the

=/tools.. ?


So I unounted the LFS partition and mkfs.ext4 -m1 -L LFS, remounted the LFS
partition and rebulit Chapter 5 and stopping.  the ran the following tests

I know it is happening during the chapter 5 build ( Nothing from Chapter 6
built at this point ).  The first ( ld test ) is the same as the adjusting
tool chain step the the second one ( gcc test ) gets it correct.

lfs:/mnt/lfs/usr/src/LFS-RPM$ ld --verbose | grep SEARCH_DIR | tr -s ' ;' \\012
SEARCH_DIR("=/tools/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib64")
SEARCH_DIR("/tools/lib")
SEARCH_DIR("=/tools/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib")

lfs:/mnt/lfs/usr/src/LFS-RPM$ gcc -m64 -Xlinker --verbose  2>/dev/null | grep
SEARCH | sed 's/SEARCH_DIR("=\?\([^"]\+\)"); */\1\n/g'  | grep -vE '^$'
/tools/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib64
/tools/lib
/tools/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib
lfs:/mnt/lfs/usr/src/LFS-RPM$

Any explainations?


Tentative explanation:
If a searchdir begins with =, then the equal sign will be replaced with the
prefix specified with a --sysroot option. (see "man ld" at "-L" option).

I too have those = signs, and my guess is that it is because we use
--with-sysroot when building binutils-pass2. If you read "man ld" for
"-rpath-link" option, you'll see that the order in which the libraries are
searched is influenced by this flag. We need it for a couple of packages in
chapter 5, which use -rpath to specify libraries (instead of -L). But now,
this means the linker is configured to accept the --sysroot option, and it can
only accept it if the searchdir begin with =...

Pierre



Thanks for the explaination.

It just looked weird as I have not seen that before


--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

Re: [lfs-support] LFS-8.4 SEARCH_DIR

[baho-utot]

On 3/17/19 5:08 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:

On 3/17/19 3:48 PM, baho-u...@columbus.rr.com wrote:

Trying to figure this out.


    6.10. Adjusting the Toolchain

The step the results in

grep 'SEARCH.*/usr/lib' dummy.log |sed 's|; |\n|g'
SEARCH_DIR("=/tools/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib64") 
|SEARCH_DIR("/usr/lib") SEARCH_DIR("/lib")|

SEARCH_DIR("=/tools/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib")

Notice the = in front of the first and last entries.  I know they 
should be ignored but what is causing the


=/tools.. ?


So I unounted the LFS partition and mkfs.ext4 -m1 -L LFS, remounted 
the LFS partition and rebulit Chapter 5 and stopping. the ran the 
following tests


I know it is happening during the chapter 5 build ( Nothing from 
Chapter 6 built at this point ).  The first ( ld test ) is the same 
as the adjusting tool chain step the the second one ( gcc test ) gets 
it correct.


lfs:/mnt/lfs/usr/src/LFS-RPM$ ld --verbose | grep SEARCH_DIR | tr -s 
' ;' \\012

SEARCH_DIR("=/tools/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib64")
SEARCH_DIR("/tools/lib")
SEARCH_DIR("=/tools/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib")

lfs:/mnt/lfs/usr/src/LFS-RPM$ gcc -m64 -Xlinker --verbose 2>/dev/null 
| grep SEARCH | sed 's/SEARCH_DIR("=\?\([^"]\+\)"); */\1\n/g'  | grep 
-vE '^$'

/tools/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib64
/tools/lib
/tools/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib
lfs:/mnt/lfs/usr/src/LFS-RPM$

Any explainations?


It appears to be internal to gcc.  I note that if I do the same thing 
in a full up lfs system I get:


SEARCH_DIR("/usr/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib64")
SEARCH_DIR("/usr/local/lib64")
SEARCH_DIR("/lib64")
SEARCH_DIR("/usr/lib64")
SEARCH_DIR("/usr/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib")
SEARCH_DIR("/usr/local/lib")
SEARCH_DIR("/lib")
SEARCH_DIR("/usr/lib");

Of those /usr/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib64, /usr/local/lib64, /usr/lib64, 
and /usr/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib do not exist.


There is nothing we did to add them.

  -- Bruce

What I find interesting is why the = in the tools chain but it is 
correct in the final system.  I don't remember having seen the = in the 
LFS-8.3 version.  So it is my opinion that it has something to due in 
the newer version of packages.


I intend to test the completed system when I get to that point. I am 
only at the adjusting the tool chain point currently.  I shows up there 
in the testing the tool chain using the book tests.  It takes a while 
for me to get to the end of a "build" as I test and look over each and 
every step so I am confident that I scripted it correctly.  All my work 
in LFS then goes into github.


Upon using google I have found a couple of posts where it shows up on 
others system as well so it is not something that affects only my build.




--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

[lfs-support] LFS-8.4 SEARCH_DIR

[baho-utot]

Trying to figure this out.


   6.10. Adjusting the Toolchain

The step the results in

grep 'SEARCH.*/usr/lib' dummy.log |sed 's|; |\n|g'
SEARCH_DIR("=/tools/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib64") |SEARCH_DIR("/usr/lib") 
SEARCH_DIR("/lib")|

SEARCH_DIR("=/tools/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib")

Notice the = in front of the first and last entries.  I know they should 
be ignored but what is causing the


=/tools.. ?


So I unounted the LFS partition and mkfs.ext4 -m1 -L LFS, remounted the 
LFS partition and rebulit Chapter 5 and stopping. the ran the following 
tests


I know it is happening during the chapter 5 build ( Nothing from Chapter 
6 built at this point ).  The first ( ld test ) is the same as the 
adjusting tool chain step the the second one ( gcc test ) gets it correct.


lfs:/mnt/lfs/usr/src/LFS-RPM$ ld --verbose | grep SEARCH_DIR | tr -s ' 
;' \\012

SEARCH_DIR("=/tools/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib64")
SEARCH_DIR("/tools/lib")
SEARCH_DIR("=/tools/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib")

lfs:/mnt/lfs/usr/src/LFS-RPM$ gcc -m64 -Xlinker --verbose 2>/dev/null | 
grep SEARCH | sed 's/SEARCH_DIR("=\?\([^"]\+\)"); */\1\n/g'  | grep -vE '^$'

/tools/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib64
/tools/lib
/tools/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib
lfs:/mnt/lfs/usr/src/LFS-RPM$

Any explainations?


-- 
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

Re: [lfs-support] LFS Fail to Boot at End Trace...

[baho-utot]

On 3/17/19 2:25 PM, Pei Jia wrote:



Hi, Can anybody give me a hand why my built LFS failed to boot? Thank 
you very much...


The ERROR is displayed at:


https://www.longervision.cc/bugs/lfs_endtrace_fail2boot.jpg


Cheers

Pei





Looks like you don't have the correct driver for your hard drive/satt 
controller



--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

Re: [lfs-support] Help: Kernel panic - not syncing: VFS: Unable to mount root fs on unknown-block(0, 0)

[Baho Utot]

On 11/28/18 10:11 PM, Ken Moffat wrote:

On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 07:15:14PM -0600, renodr wrote:

Look for Fusion MPT support and build all of that, as well as the VMWare
VMCI Driver, SCSI Disk/Device/Generic support, Buslogic SCSI support, and
PVSCSI support. You might need the VMXNET3 driver as well.

since so many people seem to build in VMs, and have problems, maybe
we ought to document this somewhere ?  Alternatively, perhaps using
lsmod like on a distro does actually work on VMs ?

ĸen



I build using OverlayFs.  It is much better than to try to build it in a 
VM. I make a container that will have the host build system:


    msg_line "Creating root filesystem container - this may take awhile 
--> "

    dd if=/dev/zero of=host.img bs=4096 count=512000 > /dev/null 2>&1
    mkfs -t ext4 host.img > /dev/null 2>&1

then populate it with a host system ie PClinuxOS or LFS-8.2.

This gives me a host system called host.img

It gets mounted as read only:

OVERLAY=OVERLAY

msg_line "Mounting file systems --> "
mountpoint -q ${OVERLAY}/lower        || mount --read-only host.img 
${OVERLAY}/lower
mountpoint -q ${OVERLAY}/overlay        || mount -t overlay overlay -o 
lowerdir=${OVERLAY}/lower,upperdir=${OVERLAY}/upper,workdir=${OVERLAY}/workdir 
${OVERLAY}/overlay
mountpoint -q ${OVERLAY}/overlay/dev    || mount --bind /dev 
${OVERLAY}/overlay/dev
mountpoint -q ${OVERLAY}/overlay/dev/pts    || mount -t devpts devpts 
${OVERLAY}/overlay/dev/pts -o gid=5,mode=620
mountpoint -q ${OVERLAY}/overlay/proc    || mount -t proc proc 
${OVERLAY}/overlay/proc
mountpoint -q ${OVERLAY}/overlay/sys    || mount -t sysfs sysfs 
${OVERLAY}/overlay/sys
mountpoint -q ${OVERLAY}/overlay/run    || mount -t tmpfs tmpfs 
${OVERLAY}/overlay/run

msg_success

Then:

msg "Chrooting overlay file system --> "
chroot "${OVERLAY}/overlay" \
    env -i \
    HOME=/root \
    TERM="$TERM" \
    PS1='(blfs chroot) \u:\w\$ ' \
    PATH=/bin:/usr/bin:/sbin:/usr/sbin:/tools/bin \
    /bin/bash --login +h

I then build the new system.

The "lower" filesystem never gets changed

the "upper" contains all the newer files and changes to the lower ro 
filesystem


the overlay is the merge filesystem (lower merged with upper) and it is 
where you do your work








--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

Re: [lfs-support] LFS-*.2 Udev

[Baho Utot]

On 9/29/18 3:47 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:

On 09/29/2018 01:44 PM, Baho Utot wrote:
I am still working with version LFS-8.2 and I have found that eudev 
places udev.pc into /usr/share/pkgconfig directory.  I believe it 
should be moved into /usr/lib/pkgconfig with all the others.  LFS-8.3 
may have the same issue





"On most systems, pkg-config looks in /usr/lib/pkgconfig,
/usr/share/pkgconfig, /usr/local/lib/pkgconfig and
/usr/local/share/pkgconfig"

On a full BLFS system I have 24 files in /usr/share/pkgconfig so I do 
not think it is worthwhile changing the location of the .pc files.


  -- Bruce



I have not proceeded to BLFS as of yet,  I am still going thru run time 
dependencies that are missing in and not installed in the base LFS-8.2 
system.  That said I still think the udev.pc should be moved for 
correctness.


--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

[lfs-support] LFS-*.2 Udev

[Baho Utot]

I am still working with version LFS-8.2 and I have found that eudev 
places udev.pc into /usr/share/pkgconfig directory.  I believe it should 
be moved into /usr/lib/pkgconfig with all the others.  LFS-8.3 may have 
the same issue


--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

Re: [lfs-support] LFS v. 8.3 : Compiler lacks asm-goto support.. Stop.

[Baho Utot]

On 9/16/18 6:19 AM, Terence Waterhouse wrote:


> Message du 15/09/18 19:25
> De : "Ken Moffat" 
> A : "Terence Waterhouse" , "LFS Support List" 


> Copie à :
> Objet : Re: [lfs-support] LFS v. 8.3 : Compiler lacks asm-goto 
support.. Stop.

>
> On Sat, Sep 15, 2018 at 05:13:23PM +0200, Terence Waterhouse wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello all,
> >
> > > When running right at the start of chapter 8.3 to prepare the 
kernel build, I got the

> > > following message (with no further output) :
> >
> > > arch/x86/Makefile:184: *** Compiler lacks asm-goto support..  Stop.
> >
> > > As far as I can make out this is an issue with kernels before 
4.5 and the current kernel is 4.18.5. I had no

> > > build problems with gcc-8.2.0 and no test fails.
> >
> > > Should I continue or is this critical ?
>
> Short answer is that you cannot continue until you are able to
> determine what has gone wrong. At the moment you can't build a
> kernel, so you cannot boot the new system.
>
> > > Many thanks in advance
> >
> >
> > Of course I should have written "this is an issue with gcc 
versions before 4.5" sorry for that mistake.

> > Here is the output of gcc -v
> >
> > gcc -v
> > Using built-in specs.
> > COLLECT_GCC=gcc
> > 
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/libexec/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/8.2.0/lto-wrapper

> > Target: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
> > Configured with: ../configure --prefix=/usr 
--enable-languages=c,c++ --disable-multilib --disable-bootstrap 
--disable-libmpx --with-system-zlib

> > Thread model: posix
> > gcc version 8.2.0 (GCC)
>
> I've not heard of anybody hitting this problem with recent gcc.
> Google found the patch where this was proposed, the initial comment
> is:
>
> | Now that we have objtool to validate the correctness of asm-goto
> | constructs we can start using it to guarantee the absence of dynamic
> | branches (and thus speculation).
>
> So the problem appears to be in objtool. We added elfutils to LFS
> in 8.2 to support objtool, maybe something went wrong in your
> install of that (libelf).
>
> The test in the kernel tree is at scripts/gcc-goto.sh, but I don't
> know how to run that successfully from outside the kernel build (in
> particular, it needs to be persuaded to run objtool, and altered to
> not discard the output).
>
> You are using the orc unwinder ?
>
> All I can suggest is that you run ldd on the compiled objtool in the
> kernel tree (tools/objtool/objtool) to see if that reports an error
> (it should report it is linked to libelf.so.1 as libz, libc, the
> vdso and the loader.
>
> Unfortunately, the kernel build system has changed this year, and
> things which used to reliably trigger the expected error messages
> (in my experiences, trying to change the kernel config and rebuild
> the existing tree as a user after building as root, and at first boot
> a typo in the bootargs root=/dev/sda76, caused failures but with
> very odd error messages.
>
> ĸen
> --
> Tout est bien, tout va bien, tout va pour le mieux qu'il soit possible
> -- Candide, de Voltaire
> (Everything is for the best, in the best of all possible worlds)
>

Hello all and of course, Ken,

I tried your suggestions and couldn't get much (any) feedback. There 
are only source files in the tools/objtool directory

so ldd couldn't be much help.

I couldn't get gcc-goto.sh to run either. however, you mentioned 
libelf so I tried recompiling the package and it reports that
the c compiler is not working. The relevant output from config.log is 
as follow :




configure:3371: checking for gcc
configure:3387: found /usr/bin/gcc
configure:3398: result: gcc
configure:3627: checking for C compiler version
configure:3636: gcc --version >&5
gcc (GCC) 8.2.0
Copyright (C) 2018 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO
warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR 
PURPOSE.


configure:3647: $? = 0
configure:3636: gcc -v >&5
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=gcc
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/libexec/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/8.2.0/lto-wrapper
Target: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../configure --prefix=/usr --enable-languages=c,c++ 
--disable-multilib --disable-bootstrap --disable-libmpx --with-system-zlib

Thread model: posix
gcc version 8.2.0 (GCC)
configure:3647: $? = 0
configure:3636: gcc -V >&5
gcc: error: unrecognized command line option '-V'
gcc: fatal error: no input files
compilation terminated.
configure:3647: $? = 1
configure:3636: gcc -qversion >&5
gcc: error: unrecognized command line option '-qversion'; did you mean 
'--version'?

gcc: fatal error: no input files
compilation terminated.
configure:3647: $? = 1
configure:3667: checking whether the C compiler works
configure:3689: gcc    conftest.c  >&5
gcc: error trying to exec 'as': execvp: No such file or directory
configure:3693: $? = 1
configure:3731: result: no
configure: failed program was:
| /* confdefs.h */
| #define PACKAGE_NAME "elfutils"
| #define PACKAGE_TARNAME "elfutils"
| #define 

Re: [lfs-support] Booting LFS with systemd

[Baho Utot]

On 07/06/2018 02:46 AM, Xi Ruoyao wrote:

On 2018-07-05 17:05 -0400, Baho Utot wrote:

On 07/05/2018 03:48 PM, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 06/30/2018 01:29 PM, Hazel Russman wrote:

On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 01:25:29 -0400
Michael Shell  wrote:


On Thu, 28 Jun 2018 16:06:00 +0800
Xi Ruoyao  wrote:


Now I only use "initrd" directive to update CPU microcode and fix the
buggy ACPI DSDT of my laptop (another sad story).

.

And as there now seems to be several people who suffer with the
ACPI DSDT driver bug, you guys should make sure upstream is aware
of the problem, if they aren't already.

I don't know if it is a driver bug.  It seems to me a bug in DSDT itself.


I moved to FreebSD, but I am moving back to linux because of all the
non  sense going on with FreeBSD.  I'll be using the "old and proven"
init system.

Just curious, is there anything like "BSD From Scratch"?

Yes, but it doesn't work either

--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

Re: [lfs-support] Booting LFS with systemd

[Baho Utot]

On 07/05/2018 03:48 PM, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 06/30/2018 01:29 PM, Hazel Russman wrote:

On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 01:25:29 -0400
Michael Shell  wrote:


On Thu, 28 Jun 2018 16:06:00 +0800
Xi Ruoyao  wrote:


Now I only use "initrd" directive to update CPU microcode and fix the
buggy ACPI DSDT of my laptop (another sad story).


.

And as there now seems to be several people who suffer with the
ACPI DSDT driver bug, you guys should make sure upstream is aware
of the problem, if they aren't already.


...

   Cheers,

   Mike

--
I did a git bisect on my system, but I couldn't make much sense of 
the result. The commit it finally settled on didn't seem to have 
anything to with acpi.


[quote]
Bisecting: 2 revisions left to test after this (roughly 1 step)
[9af9b94068fb1ea3206a700fc222075966fbef14] x86/cpu/AMD: Handle SME 
reduction in physical address size


Bisecting: 0 revisions left to test after this (roughly 1 step)
[33c2b803edd13487518a2c7d5002d84d7e9c878f] x86/mm: Remove 
phys_to_virt() usage in ioremap()


Bisecting: 0 revisions left to test after this (roughly 0 steps)
[7744ccdbc16f0ac4adae21b3678af93775b3a386] x86/mm: Add Secure Memory 
Encryption (SME) support

[unquote]

I sent the result to the kernel acpi development list but never got 
an answer. If someone else on this list wants to try, I can send him 
my complete bisect logs.


--
Hazel
This quite frustrating. After recompiling, following the book to the 
letter, I still get a frozen LFS system.
One thing I do note however is that the freezing always occurs after 
systemd has detected that it is on a virtual machine. A number of 
error messages is send, but due to ratelimiting I can't see them 
because they are suppressed.


I had even rebuild everything with systemd-232, and that worked as 
before. But after 232, things started to behave strange. Now way to 
debug systemd, whatever I do


Help?
Frans.


This is exactly why I don't use systemd, I suggest you do the same.   At 
least with System V init you can disable things until you get a handle 
on what is happening.


I moved to FreebSD, but I am moving back to linux because of all the 
non  sense going on with FreeBSD.  I'll be using the "old and proven" 
init system.


--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

Re: [lfs-support] LFS-8.2: 6.12. File-5.32

[Baho Utot]

On 07/03/2018 05:49 PM, Ken Moffat wrote:

On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 05:17:27PM -0400, Baho Utot wrote:

I think you answered a different question from the one I asked.  I
don't care what worked in your 8.1 build, only whether all recent
versions of file show the problem in your current build.

And if they do, any other infromation you can gather will be useful.

ĸen

I am using the version of file that is in the LFS-8.2 book


It feels as if you are deliberately misunderstanding what I ask.
I'll reply to your other post.

Completely missing what you are saying.  I am using the the LFS-8.2 
handbook downloaded from the linuxfromscratch.org.  I am following the 
book using the versions AS OUTLINED in the handbook. Chapter 6.12 gives 
the version as file-5.52 and I have no idea as to why you think I am 
using anything else.   I have built the tool chain ( chapter 5) and then 
I am at this point in the build AGAIN following the LFS-8.2 handbook.


Anyway here is what I found:

I reran the the test from Chapter 6.10 and it gave this result

[Requesting program interpreter: /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2]

/lib64 is empty at this point in the build, so I proceeded with the 
following


cd /lib64
cp /lib/ld-2.27.so .
ln -sf ld-2.27.so ld-linux-x86-64.so.2

Now /lib64 has the "ld files"
the configure in chapter 6.12. File-5.32
/configure --prefix=/usr
will now complete.

My question now is what should be in /lib64 at this point?


--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

Re: [lfs-support] LFS-8.2: 6.12. File-5.32

[Baho Utot]

On 07/03/2018 05:08 PM, Ken Moffat wrote:

On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 04:53:27PM -0400, Baho Utot wrote:

On 07/03/2018 03:13 PM, Ken Moffat wrote:


Do you get the same problem with whichever version was in 8.1, or
with the current 5.33 ?

No it built,  the only thing changed between the 8.1 and this is what is in
the book.


I think you answered a different question from the one I asked.  I
don't care what worked in your 8.1 build, only whether all recent
versions of file show the problem in your current build.

And if they do, any other infromation you can gather will be useful.

ĸen


I am using the version of file that is in the LFS-8.2 book

Here is the log file:

+ cd /usr/src/Octothorpe/BUILD
+ cd file-5.32
+ ./configure --prefix=/usr
checking for a BSD-compatible install... /usr/bin/install -c
checking whether build environment is sane... yes
checking for a thread-safe mkdir -p... /tools/bin/mkdir -p
checking for gawk... gawk
checking whether make sets $(MAKE)... yes
checking whether make supports nested variables... yes
checking whether make supports nested variables... (cached) yes
checking for builtin ELF support... yes
checking for ELF core file support... yes
checking for zlib support...
checking for file formats in man section 5... no
checking build system type... x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
checking host system type... x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
checking for style of include used by make... GNU
checking for gcc... gcc
checking whether the C compiler works... yes
checking for C compiler default output file name... a.out
checking for suffix of executables...
checking whether we are cross compiling... configure: error: in 
`/usr/src/Octothorpe/BUILD/file-5.32':

configure: error: cannot run C compiled programs.
If you meant to cross compile, use `--host'.
See `config.log' for more details

--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

Re: [lfs-support] LFS-8.2: 6.12. File-5.32

[Baho Utot]

More info:

On 07/03/2018 04:53 PM, Baho Utot wrote:


On 07/03/2018 03:13 PM, Ken Moffat wrote:

On Mon, Jul 02, 2018 at 01:44:49PM -0400, Baho Utot wrote:

Having a bit of bad luck with this:

configure:3735: gcc -qversion >&5
gcc: error: unrecognized command line option '-qversion'; did you mean
'--version'?
gcc: fatal error: no input files
compilation terminated.
configure:3746: $? = 1
configure:3766: checking whether the C compiler works
configure:3788: gcc    conftest.c  >&5
configure:3792: $? = 0
configure:3840: result: yes
configure:3843: checking for C compiler default output file name
configure:3845: result: a.out
configure:3851: checking for suffix of executables
configure:3858: gcc -o conftest    conftest.c  >&5
configure:3862: $? = 0
configure:3884: result:
configure:3906: checking whether we are cross compiling
configure:3914: gcc -o conftest    conftest.c  >&5
configure:3918: $? = 0
configure:3925: ./conftest
./configure: line 3927: ./conftest: No such file or directory
configure:3929: $? = 127
configure:3936: error: in `/usr/src/Octothorpe/BUILD/file-5.32':
configure:3938: error: cannot run C compiled programs.
If you meant to cross compile, use `--host'.
See `config.log' for more details


Configure doesn't normally produce that amount of output, that looks
as if you have selected certain lines from config.log ?


Yes this is a piece from config.log


If I use ./configure --prefix=/usr --host x86_64 the configure will then 
work.


What does the --host x86_64 do to "correct" this issue?

./configure --prefix=/usr gives the following:

[putolin]

checking for pread... yes
checking for strcasestr... yes
checking for fmtcheck... no
checking for dprintf... yes
checking for gzopen in -lz... yes
checking that generated files are newer than configure... done
configure: creating ./config.status
config.status: creating Makefile
config.status: creating src/Makefile
config.status: creating magic/Makefile
config.status: creating tests/Makefile
config.status: creating doc/Makefile
config.status: creating python/Makefile
config.status: creating config.h
config.status: config.h is unchanged
config.status: executing depfiles commands
config.status: executing libtool commands
(lfs chroot) root:/usr/src/Octothorpe/BUILD/file-5.32# ./configure 
--prefix=/usr

checking for a BSD-compatible install... /usr/bin/install -c
checking whether build environment is sane... yes
checking for a thread-safe mkdir -p... /tools/bin/mkdir -p
checking for gawk... gawk
checking whether make sets $(MAKE)... yes
checking whether make supports nested variables... yes
checking whether make supports nested variables... (cached) yes
checking for builtin ELF support... yes
checking for ELF core file support... yes
checking for zlib support...
checking for file formats in man section 5... no
checking build system type... x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
checking host system type... x86_64-pc-linux-gnu
checking for style of include used by make... GNU
checking for gcc... gcc
checking whether the C compiler works... yes
checking for C compiler default output file name... a.out
checking for suffix of executables...
checking whether we are cross compiling... configure: error: in 
`/usr/src/Octothorpe/BUILD/file-5.32':

configure: error: cannot run C compiled programs.
If you meant to cross compile, use `--host'.
See `config.log' for more details

--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

Re: [lfs-support] LFS-8.2: 6.12. File-5.32

[Baho Utot]

On 07/03/2018 03:13 PM, Ken Moffat wrote:

On Mon, Jul 02, 2018 at 01:44:49PM -0400, Baho Utot wrote:

Having a bit of bad luck with this:

configure:3735: gcc -qversion >&5
gcc: error: unrecognized command line option '-qversion'; did you mean
'--version'?
gcc: fatal error: no input files
compilation terminated.
configure:3746: $? = 1
configure:3766: checking whether the C compiler works
configure:3788: gcc    conftest.c  >&5
configure:3792: $? = 0
configure:3840: result: yes
configure:3843: checking for C compiler default output file name
configure:3845: result: a.out
configure:3851: checking for suffix of executables
configure:3858: gcc -o conftest    conftest.c  >&5
configure:3862: $? = 0
configure:3884: result:
configure:3906: checking whether we are cross compiling
configure:3914: gcc -o conftest    conftest.c  >&5
configure:3918: $? = 0
configure:3925: ./conftest
./configure: line 3927: ./conftest: No such file or directory
configure:3929: $? = 127
configure:3936: error: in `/usr/src/Octothorpe/BUILD/file-5.32':
configure:3938: error: cannot run C compiled programs.
If you meant to cross compile, use `--host'.
See `config.log' for more details


Configure doesn't normally produce that amount of output, that looks
as if you have selected certain lines from config.log ?


Yes this is a piece from config.log



I am building in /usr/src/Octothrope/BUILD/ as I am building with rpmbuild.
This has not been a problem in LFS 8.1.  I am updating my LFS-8.1 build to
LFS 8.2 and have only changed the difference between the two handbooks.

Any hints to what has occurred?


Sorry, no.  I did wonder about "disk full", but if you are running
as root then that only fails when the disk really _is_ full, so
config.log would not have been fully written.


The partition that this is being built on has 20GB of free space. /tmp 
is a 16GB tempfs on the host.

It is mounted at /mnt/lfs and was clean before chapter 5 was built/installed



Usually, "only changed the difference" suggests that the builder
missed something.  But in this case, I find it hard to imagine that
any of the major changes (adding libffi, meson, ninja, python3,
openssl) have affected file, which I generally class in Rincewind
style as "boring" (and much-appreciated because of that).


If I missed something it was adjusting the toolchainThe toolchain 
test came back exactly what the book has.
I believe it was good before the adjust tool chain in chapter 6. 
Something could have when wrong there but I have not uncovered anything 
amiss.





Do you get the same problem with whichever version was in 8.1, or
with the current 5.33 ?


No it built,  the only thing changed between the 8.1 and this is what is 
in the book.




PS - we call them versions of the book, or releases.  The word
'handbook' implies a certain non-GPL'd OS ;-)

ĸen


--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

[lfs-support] LFS-8.2: 6.12. File-5.32

[Baho Utot]

Having a bit of bad luck with this:

configure:3735: gcc -qversion >&5
gcc: error: unrecognized command line option '-qversion'; did you mean 
'--version'?

gcc: fatal error: no input files
compilation terminated.
configure:3746: $? = 1
configure:3766: checking whether the C compiler works
configure:3788: gcc    conftest.c  >&5
configure:3792: $? = 0
configure:3840: result: yes
configure:3843: checking for C compiler default output file name
configure:3845: result: a.out
configure:3851: checking for suffix of executables
configure:3858: gcc -o conftest    conftest.c  >&5
configure:3862: $? = 0
configure:3884: result:
configure:3906: checking whether we are cross compiling
configure:3914: gcc -o conftest    conftest.c  >&5
configure:3918: $? = 0
configure:3925: ./conftest
./configure: line 3927: ./conftest: No such file or directory
configure:3929: $? = 127
configure:3936: error: in `/usr/src/Octothorpe/BUILD/file-5.32':
configure:3938: error: cannot run C compiled programs.
If you meant to cross compile, use `--host'.
See `config.log' for more details

I am building in /usr/src/Octothrope/BUILD/ as I am building with 
rpmbuild.  This has not been a problem in LFS 8.1.  I am updating my 
LFS-8.1 build to LFS 8.2 and have only changed the difference between 
the two handbooks.


Any hints to what has occurred?


--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

Re: [lfs-support] A Question about EFI Partition

[Baho Utot]

On 06/10/2018 12:28 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:

On 06/10/2018 08:31 AM, Rob wrote:

Xi Ruoyao  wrote:
LFS book does *not* support EFI.  If you followed the book, you should
use "legacy boot" instead of EFI.  And, since the partition table is
GPT, you should create a "BIOS boot partition" (in section 2.4.1.3 of
LFS book) for it.

There is no such thing as legacy boot on this machine.
So I have to follow the UEFI hint and hope it actually works.


Most systems do have a way to do a legacy boot.  It may be labelled 
differently though.  Look closely at the different bios screens.  If 
it can boot from a CD/DVD or USB drive, it can boot without EFI.


Since there is no need for a gui on this system, I suggest a standard 
(not systemd) build.  This is what I have for my laptop:


Number  Start (sector)    End (sector)  Size   Code  Name
   1  34    1987   977.0 KiB   EF02  grub
   2    1988  392612   190.7 MiB   8300  boot
   3  392614    39455114   18.6 GiB    8300  debian
   4    39455115    78517615   18.6 GiB    8302  home
   5    78517616    82423871   1.9 GiB 8200  Linux swap
   6    82423872   124366911   20.0 GiB    8300  lfs-8.2

   ...
   23   :)

Of course you can skip the debian partition I have if you are going to 
install from a live CD/DVD.  Since you will only have one OS on the 
system, you do not need a separate partition for home, but I still 
recommend a separate /boot partition for future flexibility.


Notes:

1.  When I set this up, I was using an old version of fdisk.  The 
initial sector for the grub partition should have been 2048 which is 
now the default for both gdisk and fdisk.


2.  Without a gui, the partition size for lfs can be quite a bit 
smaller.  A size of 8 GiB would be plenty and ensure lots of room for 
building glibc and gcc.  My last basic LFS installed size was 3.1 GiB, 
including 525 MiB for the sources (gcc build size was 3702.500 MB).


  -- Bruce




I have always used BIOS boot method in the past,  If I setup a disk with 
EFI boot with grub will it still boot on an older machine that only 
boots using the BIOS method?


I am looking to setup a disk for someone that has a newer computer than 
mine and I need to set this up using my older computer.





--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

Re: [lfs-support] Requesting to include about Package-management in lfs

[Baho Utot]

On 6/7/2018 6:21 PM, Paul Rogers wrote:

Note: the Hint about using "git" is very old, 2003.  I think you'd be hard 
pressed to find the code now, the given directory is empty.  pio is about 95% git--I've 
added some features, modified one or two.  And you can download the file from the LFS 
Hints.  See:
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/hints/downloads/files/pio-hint.txt



Can't download nuthin from the hint
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

Re: [lfs-support] Requesting to include about Package-management in lfs book

[Baho Utot]

On 6/6/2018 5:41 PM, Don Cross wrote:



On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 5:11 PM, Baho Utot <mailto:baho-u...@columbus.rr.com>> wrote:


On 6/6/2018 3:42 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:

On 06/06/2018 02:05 PM, charith madhuranga wrote:

I think its better to include  about package-management in 
lfs book.At least about popular one like deb or rpm . It

will help reader to get a proper idea about
package-management in linux and how they function to make
linux system management easy for the users.Lack of
documentation about how to combine the lfs knowledge  with
package-managment  make it frustrating.Please be kind enough
to consider about above matter and share your knowledge with us.


Have you read Section 6.3?  What wording would you suggest? 
Note that rpm and apt-get are not easily supported in source

based installations.

    -- Bruce



I build rpm into the base system.Tools is straight forward, chapter
6 needs some tickling but it can be did.


  I would be very interested to see detailed steps for adding a package 
manager like rpm or apt to an existing LFS system.  I also volunteer to 
help test and provide feedback for that. This would be fascinating 
because it would give insight into how someone could create their own 
Linux distro. I'm particularly interested in creating a tiny Linux that 
can be downloaded and installed by others, then expanded easily to suit 
their needs. It would be fun to see how small that download could be 
made, yet still contain enough that people could easily download and 
install binary packages of their choice.

- Don





https://github.com/baho-utot/LFS-RPM

--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

Re: [lfs-support] Requesting to include about Package-management in lfs book

[Baho Utot]

On 6/6/2018 3:42 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:

On 06/06/2018 02:05 PM, charith madhuranga wrote:
I think its better to include  about package-management in  lfs 
book.At least about popular one like deb or rpm . It will help reader 
to get a proper idea about package-management in linux and how they 
function to make linux system management easy for the users.Lack of 
documentation about how to combine the lfs knowledge  with 
package-managment  make it frustrating.Please be kind enough to 
consider about above matter and share your knowledge with us.


Have you read Section 6.3?  What wording would you suggest?  Note that 
rpm and apt-get are not easily supported in source based installations.


   -- Bruce




I build rpm into the base system.Tools is straight forward, chapter 6 
needs some tickling but it can be did.

--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

Re: [lfs-support] Booting LFS with systemd

[Baho Utot]

On 5/25/2018 4:35 AM, Frans de Boer wrote:

Dear all,

Attached was a picture with a repeatably failing boot when I build LFS 
with systemd support. Any suggestion where I screwed-up?


This is already like the introduction of systemd-238.

Regards, Frans.


Since pictures are not allowed:
The output ends with:
systemd[1]: Detected virtualization vw-other
systemd[1]: Detected architecture x86_64
systemd[1]: Caught , dumped core at pid 39
systemd[1}: Freezing execution
it then continues with three lines about the clocksource and it is frozen.


The only thing I know about systemd is to stay the hell away from it. 
Sorry I can not help

--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

Re: [lfs-support] Illegal instructions when trying to bring up a Ryzen

[Baho Utot]

On 3/27/2018 8:49 PM, Ken Moffat wrote:

Thought I'd mention this here, because with current gcc the use (or
omission!) of -march in CFLAGS isn't doing what I had expected.


[putolin]


I'm really mentioning this in case anybody else gets a Ryzen and
tries the same approach.

ĸen




When I use -march I use the following:

-march=x86-64 -mtune=generic

This makes LFS work on all my AMD machines ( total of 4 ) all 10 years 
or older.  Don't know if the same would work for Ryzen unless you give 
it a go.


--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

Re: [lfs-support] Adjusting the Toolchain: components with '-linux-gnu' should be ignored

[Baho Utot]

See below:

On 2/16/2018 2:40 PM, René Nyffenegger wrote:



I am actually pretty convinced that I goofed up something. Like you, I 
am trying to create my repeatable scripts.


Now, it's one thing to know that I am wrong, but a completely 
different thing to determine why I am wrong.


So, I am still trying to figure out where the GCC compilation process 
takes the information from what will constitute the

SEARCH_DIRS in the produced compiler suite.


I might have come a step closer to solve my problem

I *believe* that Step 6.16 (of LFS 8.1), described
in 
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/stable/chapter06/binutils.html, 
should

build a /usr/bin/ld executable.

This was not the case on my system.

But the step built /usr/bin/addr2line, /usr/bin/ar, /usr/bin/as etc.

Can someone confirm that such a /usr/bin/ld should indeed have been 
created with this step?





Here is the list of file that was built on my system from the chapter 6 
binutils build:


/usr/bin/addr2line
/usr/bin/ar
/usr/bin/as
/usr/bin/c++filt
/usr/bin/dwp
/usr/bin/elfedit
/usr/bin/gprof
/usr/bin/ld
/usr/bin/ld.bfd
/usr/bin/ld.gold
/usr/bin/nm
/usr/bin/objcopy
/usr/bin/objdump
/usr/bin/ranlib
/usr/bin/readelf
/usr/bin/size
/usr/bin/strings
/usr/bin/strip
/usr/include/ansidecl.h
/usr/include/bfd.h
/usr/include/bfdlink.h
/usr/include/dis-asm.h
/usr/include/plugin-api.h
/usr/include/symcat.h
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf32_x86_64.x
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf32_x86_64.xbn
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf32_x86_64.xc
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf32_x86_64.xd
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf32_x86_64.xdc
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf32_x86_64.xdw
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf32_x86_64.xn
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf32_x86_64.xr
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf32_x86_64.xs
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf32_x86_64.xsc
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf32_x86_64.xsw
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf32_x86_64.xu
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf32_x86_64.xw
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_i386.x
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_i386.xbn
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_i386.xc
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_i386.xd
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_i386.xdc
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_i386.xdw
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_i386.xn
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_i386.xr
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_i386.xs
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_i386.xsc
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_i386.xsw
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_i386.xu
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_i386.xw
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_iamcu.x
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_iamcu.xbn
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_iamcu.xc
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_iamcu.xd
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_iamcu.xdc
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_iamcu.xdw
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_iamcu.xn
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_iamcu.xr
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_iamcu.xs
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_iamcu.xsc
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_iamcu.xsw
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_iamcu.xu
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_iamcu.xw
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_k1om.x
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_k1om.xbn
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_k1om.xc
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_k1om.xd
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_k1om.xdc
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_k1om.xdw
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_k1om.xn
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_k1om.xr
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_k1om.xs
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_k1om.xsc
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_k1om.xsw
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_k1om.xu
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_k1om.xw
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_l1om.x
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_l1om.xbn
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_l1om.xc
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_l1om.xd
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_l1om.xdc
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_l1om.xdw
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_l1om.xn
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_l1om.xr
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_l1om.xs
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_l1om.xsc
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_l1om.xsw
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_l1om.xu
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_l1om.xw
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_x86_64.x
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_x86_64.xbn
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_x86_64.xc
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_x86_64.xd
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_x86_64.xdc
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_x86_64.xdw
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_x86_64.xn
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_x86_64.xr
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_x86_64.xs
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_x86_64.xsc
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_x86_64.xsw
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_x86_64.xu
/usr/lib/ldscripts/elf_x86_64.xw
/usr/lib/ldscripts/i386linux.x
/usr/lib/ldscripts/i386linux.xbn
/usr/lib/ldscripts/i386linux.xn
/usr/lib/ldscripts/i386linux.xr
/usr/lib/ldscripts/i386linux.xu
/usr/lib/libbfd-2.29.so
/usr/lib/libbfd.a
/usr/lib/libbfd.so
/usr/lib/libopcodes-2.29.so
/usr/lib/libopcodes.a
/usr/lib/libopcodes.so
/usr/share/info/as.info
/usr/share/info/bfd.info
/usr/share/info/binutils.info
/usr/share/info/gprof.info
/usr/share/info/ld.info
/usr/share/locale/bg/LC_MESSAGES/binutils.mo
/usr/share/locale/bg/LC_MESSAGES/gprof.mo
/usr/share/locale/bg/LC_MESSAGES/ld.mo
/usr/share/locale/ca/LC_MESSAGES/binutils.mo
/usr/share/locale/da/LC_MESSAGES/bfd.mo
/usr/share/locale/da/LC_MESSAGES/binutils.mo
/usr/share/locale/da/LC_MESSAGES/gprof.mo
/usr/share/locale/da/LC_MESSAGES/ld.mo
/usr/share/locale/da/LC_MESSAGES/opcodes.mo
/usr/share/locale/de/LC_MESSAGES/gprof.mo
/usr/share/locale/de/LC_MESSAGES/ld.mo
/usr/share/locale/de/LC_MESSAGES/opcodes.mo
/usr/share/locale/eo/LC_MESSAGES/gprof.mo
/usr/share/locale/es/LC_MESSAGES/bfd.mo
/usr/share/locale/es/LC_MESSAGES/binutils.mo

Re: [lfs-support] Adjusting the Toolchain: components with '-linux-gnu' should be ignored

[Baho Utot]

On 2/15/2018 10:58 AM, René Nyffenegger wrote:



On 02/15/2018 01:54 PM, Baho Utot wrote:


On 2/15/2018 5:51 AM, René Nyffenegger wrote:
As I am proceeding with building LFS, I am now in Step 6.10, 
Adjusting the Toolchain.


The book instructs me to

grep 'SEARCH.*/usr/lib' dummy.log |sed 's|; |\n|g' On my system, the 
output is:


   SEARCH_DIR("=/tools/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib64")
   SEARCH_DIR("/usr/lib")
   SEARCH_DIR("/lib")
   SEARCH_DIR("=/tools/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib")


Although the book tells me to ignore components with '-linux-gnu', I 
am still
a bit worried about the paths that start with /tools. I just want to 
be 100% positive

about going on with my build process.

So, the question is: can I ignore these -linux-gnu search strings 
ALTHOUGH they start with /tools?








This is what my build produces, the Output lines are from the Book and 
what you should be looking for.  The lines not prefixed by Output: are 
the actual lines from the test.  I believe you are good to go.  The 
"real" test comes after gcc.  That is the one that gave me the most 
grief.  Since I am doing scripted builds and I failed to remove the 
gcc symlink the install process got all balled up.



Output: [Requesting program interpreter: /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2]
  [Requesting program interpreter: /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2]

Output: /usr/lib/../lib/crt1.o succeeded
Output: /usr/lib/../lib/crti.o succeeded
Output: /usr/lib/../lib/crtn.o succeeded
/usr/lib/../lib/crt1.o succeeded
/usr/lib/../lib/crti.o succeeded
/usr/lib/../lib/crtn.o succeeded

Output: #include <...> search starts here:
Output: /usr/include
#include <...> search starts here:
 /usr/include

Output: SEARCH_DIR(/usr/lib)
Output: SEARCH_DIR(/lib)
SEARCH_DIR("=/tools/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib64")
SEARCH_DIR("/usr/lib")
SEARCH_DIR("/lib")
SEARCH_DIR("=/tools/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib");

Output: attempt to open /lib/libc.so.6 succeeded
attempt to open /lib/libc.so.6 succeeded

Output: found ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 at /lib/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2
found ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 at /lib/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2
removed 'dummy.c'
removed 'a.out'
removed 'dummy.log'



I am afraid I have to bother you again with theser SEARCH_DIRs.
While the question above pertained to step 6.10, I now have a similar
thing in Step 6.20 (Installation of GCC)

SEARCH_DIR("=/tools/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib64")
SEARCH_DIR("/usr/lib")
SEARCH_DIR("/lib")
SEARCH_DIR("=/tools/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib"

Because this will, as I believe, the final GCC for LFS, there should not be
any /tools reference at all.
Also of course, the book also mentions much more directories like lib64
and the various $(uname -m) directories.

I am not sure what GCC is supposed to search in these directories, but I 
assume
that it is for shared libraries that are not specified with -L to the 
linker.


Anyway, when GCC is compiled, from where does ./configure(? or the 
compile process) take the information
which SEARCH_DIRs it compiles into its binary/binaries(?). If I knew 
that, I could go back

to the respective point in my build and go on from there again.



The above was from 6.10

Ok the below is what you should get from 6.20
If you get something other than this you may indeed have missed 
something or something has gone wrong.
I script my builds because I know I will screw up.  Just ask my wife she 
will tell you how much and how often I screw up! According to her she is 
the only thing that keeps me from becoming a complete mess.


I can review each step and see what stupid thing I did and fix it.  Then 
I can wipe out the /mnt/lfs and run the script to start over.  That 
makes sure something did not get over looked only to come back and bite me.


  [Requesting program interpreter: /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2]
Book: [Requesting program interpreter: /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2]

/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.2.0/../../../../lib/crt1.o succeeded
/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.2.0/../../../../lib/crti.o succeeded
/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.2.0/../../../../lib/crtn.o succeeded
Book: /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.2.0/../../../../lib/crt1.o 
succeeded
Book: /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.2.0/../../../../lib/crti.o 
succeeded
Book: /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.2.0/../../../../lib/crtn.o 
succeeded


#include <...> search starts here:
 /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.2.0/include
 /usr/local/include
 /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.2.0/include-fixed
 /usr/include
Book: #include <...> search starts here:
Book:  /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.2.0/include
Book:  /usr/local/include
Book:  /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.2.0/include-fixed
Book:  /usr/include

SEARCH_DIR("/usr/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib64")
SEARCH_DIR("/usr/local/lib64")
SEARCH_DIR("/lib64")
SEARCH_DIR("/usr/lib64")
SEARCH

Re: [lfs-support] Adjusting the Toolchain: components with '-linux-gnu' should be ignored

[Baho Utot]

On 2/15/2018 5:51 AM, René Nyffenegger wrote:
As I am proceeding with building LFS, I am now in Step 6.10, Adjusting 
the Toolchain.


The book instructs me to

grep 'SEARCH.*/usr/lib' dummy.log |sed 's|; |\n|g' On my system, the 
output is:


   SEARCH_DIR("=/tools/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib64")
   SEARCH_DIR("/usr/lib")
   SEARCH_DIR("/lib")
   SEARCH_DIR("=/tools/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib")


Although the book tells me to ignore components with '-linux-gnu', I am 
still
a bit worried about the paths that start with /tools. I just want to be 
100% positive

about going on with my build process.

So, the question is: can I ignore these -linux-gnu search strings 
ALTHOUGH they start with /tools?








This is what my build produces, the Output lines are from the Book and 
what you should be looking for.  The lines not prefixed by Output: are 
the actual lines from the test.  I believe you are good to go.  The 
"real" test comes after gcc.  That is the one that gave me the most 
grief.  Since I am doing scripted builds and I failed to remove the gcc 
symlink the install process got all balled up.



Output: [Requesting program interpreter: /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2]
  [Requesting program interpreter: /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2]

Output: /usr/lib/../lib/crt1.o succeeded
Output: /usr/lib/../lib/crti.o succeeded
Output: /usr/lib/../lib/crtn.o succeeded
/usr/lib/../lib/crt1.o succeeded
/usr/lib/../lib/crti.o succeeded
/usr/lib/../lib/crtn.o succeeded

Output: #include <...> search starts here:
Output: /usr/include
#include <...> search starts here:
 /usr/include

Output: SEARCH_DIR(/usr/lib)
Output: SEARCH_DIR(/lib)
SEARCH_DIR("=/tools/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib64")
SEARCH_DIR("/usr/lib")
SEARCH_DIR("/lib")
SEARCH_DIR("=/tools/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib");

Output: attempt to open /lib/libc.so.6 succeeded
attempt to open /lib/libc.so.6 succeeded

Output: found ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 at /lib/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2
found ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 at /lib/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2
removed 'dummy.c'
removed 'a.out'
removed 'dummy.log'

--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

[lfs-support] LFS-8.1 --> LFS-8.2

[Baho Utot]

Just finished my LFS-8.1 with rpm package manager.
At this point I am happier than a pig in poop. As it will give me 
repeatable builds, if I follow the README instructions good.


It is posted on github here: https://github.com/baho-utot/LFS-RPM

I have a scripted version:
https://github.com/baho-utot/LFS-SCRIPTED

They may have some burrs under the saddle but they work for me.

It was said that LFS-8.2 is going to be out sometime this month.  Will 
it have linux 4.14.15 or will it have the current 4.14.17?


I have a config file for 4.14.17 Soast I want to use 4.14.17.

I will be building a desktop out of BLFS in the coming days.  Then my 
move from freebsd can be complete.

--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 8.1 part 6.20

[Baho Utot]

On 1/27/2018 5:48 PM, Baho Utot wrote:



On 1/27/2018 11:41 AM, Maxwell Huenink wrote:
​​After building GCC in step 6.20 there were several steps to ensure 
that the new GCC was installed correctly. Starting at "Verify the 
compiler is serching for the correct header files:", I failed to get 
the output that the book says I should get.


Rather than getting:

|#include <...> search starts here: 
/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.2.0/include /usr/local/include 
/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.2.0/include-fixed /usr/include|


I got
root:/sources/gcc-7.2.0/build# grep -B4 '^ /usr/include' dummy.log
   ignoring nonexistent directory 
"/tools/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.2.0/../../../../x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/include" 


   ignoring duplicate directory "/tools/include"
   #include "..." search starts here:
   #include <...> search starts here:
    /usr/include
​
I also did not get the correct search paths in the following step, 
which should have been:


|SEARCH_DIR("/usr/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib64") 
SEARCH_DIR("/usr/local/lib64") SEARCH_DIR("/lib64") 
SEARCH_DIR("/usr/lib64") SEARCH_DIR("/usr/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib") 
SEARCH_DIR("/usr/local/lib") SEARCH_DIR("/lib") SEARCH_DIR("/usr/lib");


|

|But instead I got:
|

root:/sources/gcc-7.2.0/build# grep 'SEARCH.*/usr/lib' dummy.log |sed 
's|; |\n|g'

SEARCH_DIR("=/tools/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib64")
SEARCH_DIR("/usr/lib")
SEARCH_DIR("/lib")
SEARCH_DIR("=/tools/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib");
​
I have already run "make install" and don't know what my next step 
should be.





I have been getting this too.  I am currently working on this and I 
think it is related to the symlink in


6.9.1. Installation of Glibc

  First create a compatibility symlink to avoid references to /tools in 
our final glibc:


ln -sfv /tools/lib/gcc /usr/lib


I have not confirmed this as I have not tried a rebuild which will be soon.



I have successfully fixed my problem with the
ln -sfv /tools/lib/gcc /usr/lib
issue.

I removed the symlink after building gcc and before installing gcc.

This is my result from testing and it matches the book.

  [Requesting program interpreter: /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2]
Book: [Requesting program interpreter: /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2]

/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.2.0/../../../../lib/crt1.o succeeded
/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.2.0/../../../../lib/crti.o succeeded
/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.2.0/../../../../lib/crtn.o succeeded
Book: /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.2.0/../../../../lib/crt1.o 
succeeded
Book: /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.2.0/../../../../lib/crti.o 
succeeded
Book: /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.2.0/../../../../lib/crtn.o 
succeeded


#include <...> search starts here:
 /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.2.0/include
 /usr/local/include
 /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.2.0/include-fixed
 /usr/include
Book: #include <...> search starts here:
Book:  /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.2.0/include
Book:  /usr/local/include
Book:  /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.2.0/include-fixed
Book:  /usr/include

SEARCH_DIR("/usr/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib64")
SEARCH_DIR("/usr/local/lib64")
SEARCH_DIR("/lib64")
SEARCH_DIR("/usr/lib64")
SEARCH_DIR("/usr/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib")
SEARCH_DIR("/usr/local/lib")
SEARCH_DIR("/lib")
SEARCH_DIR("/usr/lib");
Book: SEARCH_DIR("/usr/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib64")
Book: SEARCH_DIR("/usr/local/lib64")
Book: SEARCH_DIR("/lib64")
Book: SEARCH_DIR("/usr/lib64")
Book: SEARCH_DIR("/usr/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib")
Book: SEARCH_DIR("/usr/local/lib")
Book: SEARCH_DIR("/lib")
Book: SEARCH_DIR("/usr/lib");

dummy.log:attempt to open /lib/libc.so.6 succeeded
dummy.log:attempt to open /lib/libc.so.6 succeeded
Book: attempt to open /lib/libc.so.6 succeeded

found ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 at /lib/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2
Book: found ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 at /lib/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2
removed 'dummy.c'
removed 'a.out'
removed 'dummy.log'

On the road again
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 8.1 part 6.20

[Baho Utot]

On 1/27/2018 6:17 PM, Ken Moffat wrote:

On Sat, Jan 27, 2018 at 05:48:02PM -0500, Baho Utot wrote:



On 1/27/2018 11:41 AM, Maxwell Huenink wrote:

​​After building GCC in step 6.20 there were several steps to ensure that
the new GCC was installed correctly. Starting at "Verify the compiler is
serching for the correct header files:", I failed to get the output that
the book says I should get.

Rather than getting:

|#include <...> search starts here:
/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.2.0/include /usr/local/include
/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.2.0/include-fixed /usr/include|

I got
root:/sources/gcc-7.2.0/build# grep -B4 '^ /usr/include' dummy.log
    ignoring nonexistent directory 
"/tools/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.2.0/../../../../x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/include"
    ignoring duplicate directory "/tools/include"
    #include "..." search starts here:
    #include <...> search starts here:
     /usr/include
​
I also did not get the correct search paths in the following step, which
should have been:

|SEARCH_DIR("/usr/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib64")
SEARCH_DIR("/usr/local/lib64") SEARCH_DIR("/lib64")
SEARCH_DIR("/usr/lib64") SEARCH_DIR("/usr/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib")
SEARCH_DIR("/usr/local/lib") SEARCH_DIR("/lib") SEARCH_DIR("/usr/lib");

|

|But instead I got:
|

root:/sources/gcc-7.2.0/build# grep 'SEARCH.*/usr/lib' dummy.log |sed
's|; |\n|g'
SEARCH_DIR("=/tools/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib64")
SEARCH_DIR("/usr/lib")
SEARCH_DIR("/lib")
SEARCH_DIR("=/tools/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib");
​
I have already run "make install" and don't know what my next step
should be.




I have been getting this too.  I am currently working on this and I think it
is related to the symlink in

6.9.1. Installation of Glibc

  First create a compatibility symlink to avoid references to /tools in our
final glibc:

ln -sfv /tools/lib/gcc /usr/lib


I have not confirmed this as I have not tried a rebuild which will be soon.



I think *omitting* that symlink causes the problem.  When I was
doing test builds at the beginning of this month re Meltdown I
thought to myself "I can reuse this script to update the finished
system if I remove that symlink", so I removed it and got failures
in the sanity checks in a new LFS build.

I don't think they were identical to what Maxwell reported, but for
me the cause of the problem was obvious so I started over.

I've now built 3 minimal systems to time the PTI/retpoline changes,
and then two real systems (one complete, one now part-way through my
desktop packages) with that symlink, and on all of them the sanity
checks were fine.

I've also created a separate script for updating gcc on a completed
system (and used it to update the host system before building the
third minimal test system) *without* that symlink.

For Maxwell's problem I don't think there is any way to recover, but
maybe someboy else knows of a workaround.

ĸen

In my case the /usr/lib/gcc is very wrong as it has /tools/lib/gcc files 
in it like the following:


ls /usr/lib/gcc
x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu

which is from the cross building early in chapter 5.
I am currently looking into how that may have occurred and have a 
building in progress so I can track it down.


Might have some answers in the morning time will tell


--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 8.1 part 6.20

[Baho Utot]

On 1/27/2018 11:41 AM, Maxwell Huenink wrote:
​​After building GCC in step 6.20 there were several steps to ensure 
that the new GCC was installed correctly. Starting at "Verify the 
compiler is serching for the correct header files:", I failed to get the 
output that the book says I should get.


Rather than getting:

|#include <...> search starts here: 
/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.2.0/include /usr/local/include 
/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.2.0/include-fixed /usr/include|


I got
root:/sources/gcc-7.2.0/build# grep -B4 '^ /usr/include' dummy.log
   ignoring nonexistent directory 
"/tools/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.2.0/../../../../x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/include"

   ignoring duplicate directory "/tools/include"
   #include "..." search starts here:
   #include <...> search starts here:
    /usr/include
​
I also did not get the correct search paths in the following step, which 
should have been:


|SEARCH_DIR("/usr/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib64") 
SEARCH_DIR("/usr/local/lib64") SEARCH_DIR("/lib64") 
SEARCH_DIR("/usr/lib64") SEARCH_DIR("/usr/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib") 
SEARCH_DIR("/usr/local/lib") SEARCH_DIR("/lib") SEARCH_DIR("/usr/lib");


|

|But instead I got:
|

root:/sources/gcc-7.2.0/build# grep 'SEARCH.*/usr/lib' dummy.log |sed 
's|; |\n|g'

SEARCH_DIR("=/tools/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib64")
SEARCH_DIR("/usr/lib")
SEARCH_DIR("/lib")
SEARCH_DIR("=/tools/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib");
​
I have already run "make install" and don't know what my next step 
should be.





I have been getting this too.  I am currently working on this and I 
think it is related to the symlink in


6.9.1. Installation of Glibc

 First create a compatibility symlink to avoid references to /tools in 
our final glibc:


ln -sfv /tools/lib/gcc /usr/lib


I have not confirmed this as I have not tried a rebuild which will be soon.

--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

[lfs-support] LFS-8.1 chapter 6 GCC

[Baho Utot]

Trying to learn how this works:

When one gets the results from the test in the gcc chapter
How and where do these come from...ie what sets them?

grep -o '/usr/lib.*/crt[1in].*succeeded' dummy.log

The output of the last command should be:

/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.2.0/../../../../lib/crt1.o succeeded
/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.2.0/../../../../lib/crti.o succeeded
/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.2.0/../../../../lib/crtn.o succeeded

is the above saying that there is a symlink in the directory:
/usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.2.0/lib that points to
/usr/lib crtxx.o ?



grep -B4 '^ /usr/include' dummy.log

This command should return the following output:

#include <...> search starts here:
 /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.2.0/include
 /usr/local/include
 /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.2.0/include-fixed
 /usr/include


grep 'SEARCH.*/usr/lib' dummy.log |sed 's|; |\n|g'

References to paths that have components with '-linux-gnu' should be 
ignored, but otherwise the output of the last command should be:


SEARCH_DIR("/usr/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib64")
SEARCH_DIR("/usr/local/lib64")
SEARCH_DIR("/lib64")
SEARCH_DIR("/usr/lib64")
SEARCH_DIR("/usr/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib")
SEARCH_DIR("/usr/local/lib")
SEARCH_DIR("/lib")
SEARCH_DIR("/usr/lib");

Are the above both set in the specs file?

--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

[lfs-support] Hot diggity dog

[Baho Utot]

Just finished my LFS-8.1 build.  It has taken since Dec 18, 2017.

I have my scripted build working.

I need to create a kernel config file as the one I am using came from 
slackware.


AMD64 platform

Any one got any pointers how to do this without too much trouble?
I would like to do

make mrproper
make defconfig
make menuconfig
then add

Device Drivers  --->
  Generic Driver Options  --->
   [ ] Support for uevent helper [CONFIG_UEVENT_HELPER]
   [*] Maintain a devtmpfs filesystem to mount at /dev [CONFIG_DEVTMPFS]

If that works then I would like to build a kernel that is mostly modules:

What will I have to add for drivers to get it boot.


Next up is adding rpm package manager and making spec files for all of 
chapter6 to the end.


Thanks
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

[lfs-support] LFS-8.1 6.27. Sed-4.4

[Baho Utot]

Building my first LFS-8.1,  I am leaving FreeBSD ( Don't like the 
direction they are going in ) and returning to LFS and picking back up 
from LFS-7.5.  The onlyist departure from the book is to script the 
build.  I am building in a VirtualBox session running LFS-7.5 as host.


Following the book except for an occasional "Old Fart" error.  ( I am 
after all over 60 years old, so please excuse those types of errors ).


I have the following error: ( nothing earth shattering won't stop my build )

install -m644 doc/sed.html /usr/share/doc/sed-4.4 >> ${_logfile} 2>&1

install: cannot stat 'doc/sed.html': No such file or directory

It seems not to be present in the unpacked and processed directory ( 
after running all the book commands up to that point )


It is also not in the source tarball, ( well win7 may have hid it but as 
far as I can tell it ain't there )


What builds this file?



--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

Re: [lfs-support] LFS-8.1 Chapter 6.20. GCC-7.2.0

[Baho Utot]

On 1/4/2018 10:23 AM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:

Baho Utot wrote:



On 1/3/2018 11:01 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:

Baho Utot wrote:

I can not figure this out.

I have rebuilt the whole thing from beginning to end and I always 
get the
following upon the test for this chapter.  All previous tests are 
good.


I made a script to do the test which give me the command followed 
by the

result then the line with Book: is what I am supposted to get.


I simply can not figure out why I get the results I do.

If any one has some insight please educate me on why the difference 
with

the book.


readelf -l a.out | grep ': /lib'

[Requesting program interpreter: /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2]
Book: [Requesting program interpreter: /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2]


Looks right.


grep -o '/usr/lib.*/crt[1in].*succeeded' dummy.log

/usr/lib/../lib/crt1.o succeeded
/usr/lib/../lib/crti.o succeeded
/usr/lib/../lib/crtn.o succeeded
Book: /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.2.0/../../../../lib/crt1.o
succeeded
Book: /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.2.0/../../../../lib/crti.o
succeeded
Book: /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.2.0/../../../../lib/crtn.o
succeeded


Where did you get this?  It is not in 8.1.  Your results match the 
book.




I got it from the book I cut and pasted the book values from here:
http://linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/stable/chapter06/gcc.html



grep -B4 '^ /usr/include' dummy.log

#include <...> search starts here:
  /usr/include
Book: #include <...> search starts here:
Book:  /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.2.0/include
Book:  /usr/local/include
Book:  /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.2.0/include-fixed
Book:  /usr/include


Again, what you have matches the book.


grep 'SEARCH.*/usr/lib' dummy.log |sed 's|; |\n|g'

SEARCH_DIR("=/tools/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib64")
SEARCH_DIR("/usr/lib")
SEARCH_DIR("/lib")
SEARCH_DIR("=/tools/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib");
Book: SEARCH_DIR("/usr/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib64")
Book: SEARCH_DIR("/usr/local/lib64")
Book: SEARCH_DIR("/lib64")
Book: SEARCH_DIR("/usr/lib64")
Book: SEARCH_DIR("/usr/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib")
Book: SEARCH_DIR("/usr/local/lib")
Book: SEARCH_DIR("/lib")
Book: SEARCH_DIR("/usr/lib");


I do not know where you got these values from the book.  The book has:

"References to paths that have components with '-linux-gnu' should be
ignored, but otherwise the output of the last command should be:

SEARCH_DIR("/usr/lib")
SEARCH_DIR("/lib")"

Which matches what you have.


grep "/lib.*/libc.so.6 " dummy.log

attempt to open /lib/libc.so.6 succeeded
Book: attempt to open /lib/libc.so.6 succeeded


Looks good to me.


grep found dummy.log

found ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 at /lib/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2
Book: found ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 at /lib/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2


Also looks good.



Here is where I get the book values

http://linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/stable/chapter06/gcc.html

all the values labeled Book: came from there


I was comparing your values to those in Section 6.10, Adjusting the 
Toolchain.  Are you sure you installed gcc after you built it in 
Chapter 6?


In chroot, what is the output of 'echo $PATH'  and 'type -p gcc' ?

It should be: /bin:/usr/bin:/sbin:/usr/sbin:/tools/bin and 
/usr/bin/gcc respectively.


  -- Bruce


I am building the entire system and I am at 6.20 GCC-7.2.0.  I stopped 
at the testing gcc part on down the page.  the path is fine and the type 
-p returns /usr/bin/gcc.



--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

Re: [lfs-support] LFS-8.1 Chapter 6.20. GCC-7.2.0

[Baho Utot]

On 1/3/2018 11:01 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:

Baho Utot wrote:

I can not figure this out.

I have rebuilt the whole thing from beginning to end and I always get 
the

following upon the test for this chapter.  All previous tests are good.

I made a script to do the test which give me the command followed by the
result then the line with Book: is what I am supposted to get.


I simply can not figure out why I get the results I do.

If any one has some insight please educate me on why the difference with
the book.


readelf -l a.out | grep ': /lib'

[Requesting program interpreter: /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2]
Book: [Requesting program interpreter: /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2]


Looks right.


grep -o '/usr/lib.*/crt[1in].*succeeded' dummy.log

/usr/lib/../lib/crt1.o succeeded
/usr/lib/../lib/crti.o succeeded
/usr/lib/../lib/crtn.o succeeded
Book: /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.2.0/../../../../lib/crt1.o 
succeeded
Book: /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.2.0/../../../../lib/crti.o 
succeeded
Book: /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.2.0/../../../../lib/crtn.o 
succeeded


Where did you get this?  It is not in 8.1.  Your results match the book.




I got it from the book I cut and pasted the book values from here:
http://linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/stable/chapter06/gcc.html



grep -B4 '^ /usr/include' dummy.log

#include <...> search starts here:
  /usr/include
Book: #include <...> search starts here:
Book:  /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.2.0/include
Book:  /usr/local/include
Book:  /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.2.0/include-fixed
Book:  /usr/include


Again, what you have matches the book.


grep 'SEARCH.*/usr/lib' dummy.log |sed 's|; |\n|g'

SEARCH_DIR("=/tools/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib64")
SEARCH_DIR("/usr/lib")
SEARCH_DIR("/lib")
SEARCH_DIR("=/tools/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib");
Book: SEARCH_DIR("/usr/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib64")
Book: SEARCH_DIR("/usr/local/lib64")
Book: SEARCH_DIR("/lib64")
Book: SEARCH_DIR("/usr/lib64")
Book: SEARCH_DIR("/usr/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib")
Book: SEARCH_DIR("/usr/local/lib")
Book: SEARCH_DIR("/lib")
Book: SEARCH_DIR("/usr/lib");


I do not know where you got these values from the book.  The book has:

"References to paths that have components with '-linux-gnu' should be 
ignored, but otherwise the output of the last command should be:


SEARCH_DIR("/usr/lib")
SEARCH_DIR("/lib")"

Which matches what you have.


grep "/lib.*/libc.so.6 " dummy.log

attempt to open /lib/libc.so.6 succeeded
Book: attempt to open /lib/libc.so.6 succeeded


Looks good to me.


grep found dummy.log

found ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 at /lib/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2
Book: found ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 at /lib/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2


Also looks good.

  -- Bruce



Here is where I get the book values

http://linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/stable/chapter06/gcc.html

all the values labeled Book: came from there



--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

[lfs-support] LFS-8.1 Chapter 6.20. GCC-7.2.0

[Baho Utot]

I can not figure this out.

I have rebuilt the whole thing from beginning to end and I always get 
the following upon the test for this chapter.  All previous tests are good.


I made a script to do the test which give me the command followed by the 
result then the line with Book: is what I am supposted to get.



I simply can not figure out why I get the results I do.

If any one has some insight please educate me on why the difference with 
the book.



readelf -l a.out | grep ': /lib'

[Requesting program interpreter: /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2]
Book: [Requesting program interpreter: /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2]

grep -o '/usr/lib.*/crt[1in].*succeeded' dummy.log

/usr/lib/../lib/crt1.o succeeded
/usr/lib/../lib/crti.o succeeded
/usr/lib/../lib/crtn.o succeeded
Book: /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.2.0/../../../../lib/crt1.o 
succeeded
Book: /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.2.0/../../../../lib/crti.o 
succeeded
Book: /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.2.0/../../../../lib/crtn.o 
succeeded


grep -B4 '^ /usr/include' dummy.log

#include <...> search starts here:
 /usr/include
Book: #include <...> search starts here:
Book:  /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.2.0/include
Book:  /usr/local/include
Book:  /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/7.2.0/include-fixed
Book:  /usr/include

grep 'SEARCH.*/usr/lib' dummy.log |sed 's|; |\n|g'

SEARCH_DIR("=/tools/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib64")
SEARCH_DIR("/usr/lib")
SEARCH_DIR("/lib")
SEARCH_DIR("=/tools/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib");
Book: SEARCH_DIR("/usr/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib64")
Book: SEARCH_DIR("/usr/local/lib64")
Book: SEARCH_DIR("/lib64")
Book: SEARCH_DIR("/usr/lib64")
Book: SEARCH_DIR("/usr/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/lib")
Book: SEARCH_DIR("/usr/local/lib")
Book: SEARCH_DIR("/lib")
Book: SEARCH_DIR("/usr/lib");

grep "/lib.*/libc.so.6 " dummy.log

attempt to open /lib/libc.so.6 succeeded
Book: attempt to open /lib/libc.so.6 succeeded


grep found dummy.log

found ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 at /lib/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2
Book: found ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 at /lib/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2

removed 'dummy.c'
removed 'a.out'
removed 'dummy.log'

-- 
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

[lfs-support] dbus tarball included in wget-list.txt

[Baho Utot]

I am returning to LFS after a few years of using FreeBSD and I am 
currently building LFS-8.1


The following tarbar is included itno the LFS-8.1 wget-list.txt file

http://dbus.freedesktop.org/releases/dbus/dbus-1.10.22.tar.gz

It is not used in the LFS-8.1 build as it is not in the handbook as far 
as I can tell (unless I missed it)


The:

 http://linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/stable/chapter03/packages.html

does not list it

Is it used of did I miss something?


Later

--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

Re: [lfs-support] Vim-7.4 Fails to Configure at the end of Ch. 5

[Baho Utot]

On Monday, June 23, 2014 04:38:52 PM Baho Utot wrote:

 Try this it worked for me, configure completed.
 Have not run make yet ( didn't have time but will try later )
 
 It is all one line kmail wrapped it
 
 CPPFLAGS=-I/tools/include  LDFLAGS=-L/tools/lib  ./configure --
 prefix=/tools --enable-multibyte --with-tlib=ncursesw


This was building after completion of the Chapter 5 toolchain and without 
anything in chapter 6

Ran make and had to change the above to 

CPPFLAGS=-I/tools/include -L/tools/lib ./configure prefix=/tools --enable-
multibyte --with-tlib=ncursesw  --enable-gui=no --with-x=no

configure completes and make completes.

Then 
make DESTDIR=/mnt/lfs/tmp install
which install this into a temporary place for testing 
( make install to put it in /tools )

Ok now for test
/mnt/lfs/tools/bin/vim 

editor works with lfs user.  I have not tested it in a chroot environment as I 
have not built chapter 6,  that is in process.






-- 
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: [lfs-support] Problem partioning

[Baho Utot]

On Saturday, June 21, 2014 12:31:03 PM Philippe Delavalade wrote:
 Hi all.
 
 I want to build LFS on a new computer.
 
 It seems to me I have a problem with my swap partition. I did a mistake
 when creating the LFS partition and so, I had to recreate the swap
 partition.
 
 I used cgdisk on a ssd ; the host system is debian/testing.
 
 gdisk with the 'p' command says :
 
 Number  Start (sector)End (sector)  Size   Code  Name
1204858593279   27.9 GiB8300  racine
25859328062787583   2.0 GiB 8200
36278758483759103   10.0 GiB8300  lfs
 
 but a swapon -s command just says Filename.
 
 A mount command does not say anything about the swap partition and blkid
 gives
 /dev/sda2: UUID=... TYPE=ext4
 
 In my /etcfstab file I have the line
 /dev/sda2 none swap sw 0 0
 
 I think it is not correct for my swap partition but maybe I'm wrong ? If
 I'm right, what should I do ?
 
 Thanks for help


Don't use a swap partition

See: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/swap to create a swap file instead
 
-- 
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: [lfs-support] how to install rpm in lfs

[Baho Utot]

On Monday, June 16, 2014 02:39:35 PM Pierre Labastie wrote:
 Le 16/06/2014 14:23, Alice Wonder a écrit :
  On 06/16/2014 05:03 AM, Baho Utot wrote:
  On 06/16/2014 02:55 AM, Alice Wonder wrote:
  Hi,
  
  It is possible to build RPM for lfs but it requires some effort, and
  then once built you basically have to rebuild every package in LFS
  with RPM or else RPM dependencies are never met.
  
  Building LFS with rpm requires little to no effort.  All one needs is
  the following packages
  zlib, nspr, nss, popt, readline, elfutils and rpm.  You DO NOT have
  to rebuild a single package.
  You are talking non-sense.
  
  Well if you want to install everything with --nodeps then you don't
  have rebuild stuff, but then what's the point?
 
 I think the principle is to build rpm and its deps in chapter 5, so that
 you build the whole of chapter 6 with rpm using spec-files. What deps
 you put in your specs is a matter of convenience.
 
 OTOH, maybe nonsense is slightly exagerated ;-)
 
 Pierre

Added deps in the spec files are only needed for installing using the rpms 
built onto multiple systems.  And then it's not a matter of necessity. Only 
ease of use issue.


-- 
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

[lfs-support] Python

[Baho Utot]

I am building BLFS-7.5 to  develope a desktop system.

I am currently building Xorg and I am at the xcb-proto-1.10 step
It states the following:

Required 
Python-2.7.6 or Python-3.3.4, and Xorg build environment (should be set for 
the following instructions to work)

What in the book requires Python version 2 or is all the packages able to use 
Python version 3?

I don't really want to have both on the system and don't want to get boxed 
into a corner when I build other packages.

Should I use Python version 3 or 2?

I am good with either, doesn't matter to me which but I would rather not have 
both.

What is the recomentation?


-- 
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: [lfs-support] Python

[Baho Utot]

On Monday, June 16, 2014 05:54:49 PM Armin K. wrote:
 Wrong list.
 
 On 16.6.2014 17:45, Baho Utot wrote:
  I am building BLFS-7.5 to  develope a desktop system.
  
  I am currently building Xorg and I am at the xcb-proto-1.10 step
  It states the following:
  
  Required
  Python-2.7.6 or Python-3.3.4, and Xorg build environment (should be set
  for
  the following instructions to work)
  
  What in the book requires Python version 2 or is all the packages able to
  use Python version 3?
 
 No.
 
  I don't really want to have both on the system and don't want to get boxed
  into a corner when I build other packages.
  
  Should I use Python version 3 or 2?
 
 You can use both on the same system with NO runtime conflicts (much like
 GTK+2 and GTK+3).
 
  I am good with either, doesn't matter to me which but I would rather not
  have both.
  
  What is the recomentation?
 
 Use Python 2. Lots of packages expect /usr/bin/python to be a symlink to
 /usr/bin/python2.

Ok thanks 
I will go Python 2 and make the symlink if it is not in the book

-- 
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: [lfs-support] KDE Question - akonadiserver always at 100%

[Baho Utot]

On Monday, June 09, 2014 01:50:07 PM Bruce Dubbs wrote:
 I just finished doing an install of KDE-4.13.1.  It starts fine and I
 don't really notice any interface issues (other than the designed ones :).
 
 However, I do notice in top:
 
PID USER   VIRT   RES  SHR  S  %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND
 24929 bdubbs 250796 9552 7688 R  98.3 0.1  824:28.64 akonadiserver
 
 Having a process using basically all of a core is not something I want.
   A few google entries discuss the same thing, but they are a few years old.
 
 This happens even when the window manager is idle (blanked) and I am
 only accessing the system via ssh.
 
 Does anyone here know what is happening and how to fix this?
 
-- Bruce

I think you can turn it off under
System Settings-Desktop Search - System Settings
Then
deselect Enable Desktop Search

It use to be you could turn off under a akonadi tab but it looks like it is 
hidden

?xml version=1.0 encoding=UTF-8?
Soapbox
pissing_me_off 
That's what is pissing me off about OpenSource and linux in 
general.  
It has become just like microsoft with every thing hidden.
pissing_me_off/
Gripe
It use to be easy to do things under linux now it is a chore,  
try  
running Gparted.  It will bitch that you are not root and when 
you  
sudo gparted in a terminal widow it won't find the Display.  
Then if 
you try to login as root in kdm you can't because it is not 
allowed.
Gripe/
Soapbox / 


-- 
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page