Re: [lfs-support] bootup sequence

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 4/19/21 2:31 PM, Brian Hagen wrote:

Hello, all:

     I am satisfied with the stability of the 9.1. 10.0, and 10.1 LFS
releases that I have built. Even so, I would like to take some time to
get very familiar with the bootup sequences they have. Ideally, it could
be possible to trace the program execution (at some level) from the
handoff of the BIOS to GRUB, then to the handoff to the kernel, all the
way to the login prompt.

     From what I have read, the first code executed once the kernel has
been loaded into memory is the code compiled from init.c. (However, I
could be off-track on this). I realize that an atomic trace-level
analysis is not realistic, since the code is translated (as usual) into
object code. Thus, unless someone were to have a full-fledged IDE
development environment with real-time debugging, that C-code to
object-code translation with single-stepping, breakpoints, etc. would be
all but impossible.

     Even so, I would like to get to know a good overview how the LFS
system does its initialization all the way up to the presentation of the
login prompt. If there are any system documents available, that might be
a really good resource.


The first program that the kernel runs is init.  The code is in the 
kernel init/main.c:


if (!try_to_run_init_process("/sbin/init") ||
!try_to_run_init_process("/etc/init") ||
!try_to_run_init_process("/bin/init") ||
!try_to_run_init_process("/bin/sh"))
   return 0;

What that program is depends on the version of the book.  It will come 
from sysvinit or systemd.  systemd is very complex.  sysvinit is a lot 
simpler.   For that check 'man inittab'  From there follow the programs 
that it runs, primarily /etc/rc.d/init.d/rc and /sbin/agetty.


  -- Bruce
--
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] init-functions: new pidofproc function: posix compliant: no sub shells: tested

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 4/9/21 12:50 PM, Tim Tassonis wrote:

Hi Scott

On 4/9/21 12:16 PM, Scott Andrews wrote:


On 4/9/21 2:10 AM, Tim Tassonis wrote:

Hi Scott

On 4/9/21 2:40 AM, Scott Andrews wrote:

# Function:    pidofproc [-p pidfile] pathname
#   The pidofproc function shall return one or more process
#   identifiers for a particular daemon using the algorithm
#   given above. Only process identifiers of running
#   processes should be returned. Multiple process
#   identifiers shall be separated by a single space.
#   The pidofproc function shall return the LSB defined exit
#   status codes for "status". It shall return 0 if the
#   program is running and not 0 otherwise.
#
#   If the status action is requested, the init script will return
#   the following exit status codes.
#   0   program is running or service is OK
#   1   program is dead and /var/run pid file exists
#   2   program is dead and /var/lock lock file exists
#   3   program is not running
#   4   program or service status is unknown
#   5-99    reserved for future LSB use
#   100-149 reserved for distribution use
#   150-199 reserved for application use
#   200-254 reserved
function pidofproc {
 local pidfile=""
 local program=""
 local pid=""
 local pidlist=""
 local list=""
 local exitstatus=0
 # Process arguments
 while [[ $# -gt 0 ]]; do
     case "${1}" in
         -p) shift; pidfile="${1}" ;;
         *)    program="${1##*/}" ;;
     esac
     shift
 done
 # If a PID file is not specified, make one
 test -z "${pidfile}" && pidfile="/var/run/${program}.pid"
 # If a pid file exists and is readable, use it.
 if [[ -r "${pidfile}" ]]; then
     list=$(head -n1 "${pidfile}")
 else
     list=$(pidof "${program}")
     exitstatus=$?
     if [[ ${exitstatus} -gt 0 ]]; then exitstatus=4; fi
 fi
 if [[ exitstatus -eq 0 ]]; then
     # Figure out if all listed PIDs are running.
     for pid in ${list}; do
         if kill -0 "${pid}" 2> /dev/null; then
             pidlist+="${pid} "
         else
             exitstatus=1
         fi
     done
 fi
 if [[ -z "${pidlist}" ]]; then
     if [[ -f "${pidfile}" ]]; then
         exitstatus=1
     else
         exitstatus=3
     fi
 fi
 printf "%s" "${pidlist% }"
 return ${exitstatus}
}


Testing Function: pidofproc: Start
Testing pidofproc: valid program, no pidfile: running
 Returns pid and exit status of 0
 pidofproc /usr/sbin/dhcpcd: >:pid:[472] exit status:[0]
 pidofproc dhcpcd: >:pid:[472] exit status:[0]

Testing pidofproc: valid program, valid pidfile: running
 Returns pid and exit status of 0
 pidofproc -p /var/run/dhcpcd.pid /usr/sbin/dhcpcd: 
>:pid:[472] exit status:[0]
 pidofproc /usr/sbin/dhcpcd -p /var/run/dhcpcd.pid: 
>:pid:[472] exit status:[0]
 pidofproc -p /var/run/dhcpcd.pid dhcpcd: >:pid:[472] exit 
status:[0]
 pidofproc dhcpcd -p /var/run/dhcpcd.pid: >: pid:[472] exit 
status:[0]


Testing pidofproc: invalid program, no pidfile
 Returns no pid and exit status of 3
 pidofproc /usr/sbin/barf: >: pid:[] exit status:[3]

Testing pidofproc: valid program, invalid pidfile: running
 Returns pid and exit status of 0
 pidofproc -p barf.pid /usr/sbin/dhcpcd: >: pid:[472] exit 
status:[0]
 pidofproc /usr/sbin/dhcpcd -p barf.pid: >: pid:[472] exit 
status:[0]


Testing pidofproc: valid program, no pidfile: not running
 Returns no pid and exit status of 3
 pidofproc /bin/ls: >: pid:[] exit status:[3]

Testing pidofproc: valid program: valid pidfile: not running
 Returns no pid and exit status of 1

touch /var/run/ls.pid

     pidofproc /bin/ls: >: pid:[] exit status:[1]
 pidofproc -p /var/run/ls.pid /bin/ls: >: pid:[] exit 
status:[1]

rm /var/run/ls.pid



Looks great, tested it successfully with bash. Testing with busybox 
ash does not work, but naturally, this is not needed on an LFS system.



This script is not intended to run with ash, the she bang line is as 
follows


#!/bin/bash --posix



Fully agree.






I do have one question however:

Testing with invalid program and valid pidfile results in printing 
the pid and returning 0:


Test with vaild program and valid pidfile:


root@keegan:~# ./pidofproc -p /var/run/dhcpcd-eno1.pid /sbin/dhcpcd
3144root@keegan:~# echo $?
0

root@keegan:~# ./pidofproc -p /var/run/dhcpcd-eno1.pid /sbin/dhcpcf
3144root@keeganecho $?
0

In the second case, /sbin/dhcpcf does not exist, but the pidfile 
does, and belongs to /sbin/dhcpcd. Is this intended behaviour? Not 
that this really matters a lot in real-world, as the function 
certainly will not be called that way often.




It reads the pidfile and if the process is running with then

     for pid in ${list}; do
         if kill -0 "${pid}" 2> /dev/null;then
             pidlist+="${pid} "
 

Re: [lfs-support] ERROR: init-functions: start_daemon

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 4/2/21 6:29 AM, Scott Andrews wrote:


On 4/1/21 11:06 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:

On 4/1/21 7:15 PM, Scott Andrews wrote:


in init-functions start_daemon pidfile is not validated before 
removing...


code as follows


[snip]


 # Execute
 if [ -z "${force}" ]; then
 if [ -z "${pidfile}" ]; then
 # Determine the pid by discovery
 pidlist=`pidofproc "${1}"`
 retval="${?}"

    ^^

    needs to set pidfile here otherwise rm -f "${pidfile}" 
fails below


rm -f anything

will never fail unless it is a directory or there are permission 
problems.


-f, --force
   ignore nonexistent files and arguments, never prompt



That isn't the point,  the script is going to remove any file passed to 
the function with the -p  argument.


It will also execute rm -f "" everytime it is run without passing -p 
 and the daemon is not running as pidfile is always unset 
without passing -p 



     1)
     # Program is not running, but an invalid pid file exists
     # remove the pid file and continue
     rm -f "${pidfile}"


Maybe you don't care but I care about correctness.


Your distro, your rules.



The boot scripts also spawn many subshells where that just isn't necessary.

Use the bash builtins, that is what they are there for.




--
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] ERROR: init-functions: start_daemon

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 4/1/21 7:15 PM, Scott Andrews wrote:


in init-functions start_daemon pidfile is not validated before removing...

code as follows


[snip]


     # Execute
     if [ -z "${force}" ]; then
     if [ -z "${pidfile}" ]; then
     # Determine the pid by discovery
     pidlist=`pidofproc "${1}"`
     retval="${?}"

    ^^

    needs to set pidfile here otherwise rm -f "${pidfile}" fails 
below


rm -f anything

will never fail unless it is a directory or there are permission problems.

-f, --force
   ignore nonexistent files and arguments, never prompt


  -- Bruce
--
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] ERROR: init-functions: killproc

[Bruce Dubbs]

I think you are right, but it's low priority right now.  We are really 
busy trying to get a new server set up properly.


For now there is
http://wiki.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/ticket/4842

  -- Bruce

On 4/1/21 9:35 AM, Scott Andrews wrote:

This code is from killproc:

If killproc is called ( for example: /etc/init.d/sysklogd: killproc 
/sbin/klogd )


and the pid file exists and the process in not running:

then the case statement receives a 1 exit status from from 
pidlist=`pidofproc "${1}"` ,pidlist contains "" and pidfile is unset


so in processing that return status in the cast statement never removes 
the stale pid file as ${pidfile} is never set.



    # Check for a valid program
     if [ ! -e "${program}" ]; then return 5; fi

     # Check for a valid signal
     check_signal "${signal}"
     if [ "${?}" -ne "0" ]; then return 2; fi

     # Get a list of pids
     if [ -z "${pidfile}" ]; then
     # determine the pid by discovery
     pidlist=`pidofproc "${1}"`
     retval="${?}"
     else
     # The PID file contains the needed PIDs
     # Note that by LSB requirement, the path must be given to 
pidofproc,
     # however, it is not used by the current implementation or 
standard.

     pidlist=`pidofproc -p "${pidfile}" "${1}"`
     retval="${?}"
     fi

     # Return a value ONLY
     # It is the init script's (or distribution's functions) responsibilty
     # to log messages!
     case "${retval}" in

     0)
     # Program is running correctly
     # Do nothing here, let killproc continue.
     ;;

     1)
     # Program is not running, but an invalid pid file exists
     # Remove the pid file.
     rm -f "${pidfile}"

     # This is only a success if no signal was passed.
     if [ -n "${nosig}" ]; then
     return 0
     else
     return 7
     fi
     ;;


Suggest the following.

     1)
     # Program is not running, but an invalid pid file exists
     # Remove the pid file

             progname=${program##*/}
             if [[ -e "/run/${progname}.pid" ]]; then

     pidfile="/run/${progname}.pid"

             rm -f "${pidfile}"

     fi

     # This is only a success if no signal was passed.
     if [ -n "${nosig}" ]; then
     return 0
     else
     return 7
     fi

Or

     1)
     # Program is not running, but an invalid pid file exists
     # Remove the pid file

             progname=${program##*/}
             if [[ -e "/run/${progname}.pid" ]]; then rm -f 
"/run/${progname}.pid"; fi


     # This is only a success if no signal was passed.
     if [ -n "${nosig}" ]; then
     return 0
     else
     return 7
     fi



--
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] ERROR: lib/lsb/init-functions: check_sig_type()

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 3/30/21 7:51 AM, Scott Andrews wrote:


On 3/30/21 12:34 AM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:

On 3/29/21 7:30 PM, Scott Andrews wrote:


The existing function does not return a correct result for all signal 
types.





# check_sig_type() #



Original less empty lines

check_sig_type()

{
 local valsig
 # The list of termination signals (limited to generally used items)
 valsig="-ALRM -INT -KILL -TERM -PWR -STOP -ABRT -QUIT -2 -3 -6 
-9 -14 -15"

 echo "${valsig}" | grep -- " ${1} " > /dev/null
 if [ "${?}" -eq "0" ]; then
 return 0
 else
 return 1
 fi
}


You are right, there is an error.  The grep is for " ${1} " and there 
is no leading space for -ALRM and no trailing space for -15.  A simple 
fix.


That said, I checked the usage.  The function is only used by killproc 
in init-functions.  Checking further, the scripts that call killproc 
only refer to -HUP, -QUIT, -USR1, and -USR2.


That said, it should be fixed, but is low priority and should be 
deferred until the next change is necessary.


It also fails if the signal does not have a - before it.  Notice the 
function should take -ALRM and ALRM, according to the notes before the 
function.  Also man 7 signal gives the signal as SIGALRM, most are 
prefixed by SIG, also notice that they don't have - in front of them 
(standard signals).


Yes, the comments are wrong.  The signal is used by killproc which uses 
the kill command without -s.  That makes the leading dash required for 
this implementation.


  -- Bruce

--
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] ERROR: lib/lsb/init-functions: check_sig_type()

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 3/29/21 7:30 PM, Scott Andrews wrote:


The existing function does not return a correct result for all signal 
types.





# check_sig_type() #



Original less empty lines

check_sig_type()

{
     local valsig
     # The list of termination signals (limited to generally used items)
     valsig="-ALRM -INT -KILL -TERM -PWR -STOP -ABRT -QUIT -2 -3 -6 -9 
-14 -15"

     echo "${valsig}" | grep -- " ${1} " > /dev/null
     if [ "${?}" -eq "0" ]; then
     return 0
     else
     return 1
     fi
}


You are right, there is an error.  The grep is for " ${1} " and there is 
no leading space for -ALRM and no trailing space for -15.  A simple fix.


That said, I checked the usage.  The function is only used by killproc 
in init-functions.  Checking further, the scripts that call killproc 
only refer to -HUP, -QUIT, -USR1, and -USR2.


That said, it should be fixed, but is low priority and should be 
deferred until the next change is necessary.


  -- Bruce
--
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] Boot scripts: request for comments

[Bruce Dubbs]

Copying to the list.

On 3/22/21 4:53 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:

On 3/22/21 3:57 PM, Scott Andrews wrote:


On 3/22/21 1:41 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:

On 3/22/21 11:54 AM, Scott Andrews wrote:



Actually it doesn't..


Test-rc.sh: Begin Run: print_error_msg

*  
[ FAIL ]


   You should not be reading this error message.
   It means that an unforeseen error took place in
   /etc/rc.d/rc3.d/S80ntpd,
   which exited with a return value of 1.
   If you're able to track this error down to a bug in one of the
   files provided by the HBL book
   Please be so kind to inform us at scott.andr...@columbus.rr.com.
*  
[ FAIL ]

Press Enter to continue...

cat bootlog
Mar 22 16:30:55 -04:00 scott.example.org   FAIL
Mar 22 16:30:55 -04:00 scott.example.org
   You should not be reading this error message.
   It means that an unforeseen error took place in
   /etc/rc.d/rc3.d/S80ntpd,
   which exited with a return value of 1.
   If you're able to track this error down to a bug in one of the
   files provided by the HBL book
   Please be so kind to inform us at scott.andr...@columbus.rr.com.
  FAIL


You are right that the failure messages are not perfect.  I have been 
aware of them, but did not feel it important enough to fix.  It has to 
do with coordinating the FAIL outout with the multi-line MSG.


How would you fix it?





And shellcheck is quite correct,  if there


Not for our usage.



Yes for all usages.

Show me an example of where shellcheck is not correct and causes the 
boot scripts to fail or error.


I have found it to work when run upon all the scripts/sourced scripts. 
You may have to correct a couple of things but the result works


It wants to use "\\n" in strings.  If I do
   echo -e $MSG
it prints the backslash and does not output a newline.


I am rewriting the boot init files to a standard.


What standard?



The standard that others seem to be using, or picking up.


I see. That does not seem to conform to the term "standard".  There does 
not seem to be an authority to establish that standard.


It would do well to have a "lint" of some kind before releasing a 
script onto the horde.


If a lint is available for use, I use it or run it on what ever 
project I am wroking on.


shellcheck and rpmlint are two that comes to mind.


Those seem to really be suggestions by the authors.

Yes I have found that the boot scripts do indeed do not work 
properly in some cases.


What are those cases?



Does not work with swap partitions.


What doesn't work?  We do swapon -a and swapoff -a.  Any problems with 
that would be different requirements.



Brings up all IFACES on restarting as in /etc/init.d/network restart


OK, I'll buy that.  How would you fix it?  I'll note that when bringing 
down the network the script should check that the interface is indeed up 
before running ifdown.  The result there is just some unwanted messages, 
but don't affect the operation.


No way to disable a /etc/sysconfig/ifconfig.* file without moving or 
renaming it.


I agree with that also.  What would you propose?


clock fails if the hardware does not contain a hardware clock.


I never considered that.  How would you fix it?

   -- Bruce


--
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] Boot scripts: request for comments

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 3/22/21 10:44 AM, Scott Andrews wrote:


Syntax errors found in /etc/init.d/rc...


Not errors, but someone's preferences.  For instance all the
'Prefer explicit escaping: "\\n"' issues are wrong.  The page
https://github.com/koalaman/shellcheck/wiki/SC1001 says:

Rationale:

You have escaped something that has no special meaning when escaped. The 
backslash will be simply be ignored.


is not true in these cases.  A \n certainly does have a special meaning.



Looking at https://github.com/koalaman/shellcheck/wiki/SC1091 it appears 
that you are not running shellcheck properly.  It appears that you need 
to specify disable=SC1091.




The thing I did notice is the inconsistency between "." and source

. /lib/lsb/init-functions
[ -r /etc/sysconfig/rc.site ] && source /etc/sysconfig/rc.site

However, the header line is #!/bin/bash and is not an error.

If you really think there is an error, give us an example where the code 
does not work properly.


  -- Bruce





Found by shellcheck


In rc line 15:
. /lib/lsb/init-functions
^-- SC1091: Not following: /lib/lsb/init-functions was not specified as 
input (see shellcheck -x).



In rc line 21:
    MSG="FAILURE:\n\nYou should not be reading this error message.\n\n"
     ^-- SC1117: Backslash is literal in "\n". Prefer 
explicit escaping: "\\n".
   ^-- SC1117: Backslash is literal in "\n". Prefer 
explicit escaping: "\\n".

^-- SC1117: Backslash is literal in "\n". Prefer explicit escaping: "\\n".
^-- SC1117: Backslash is literal in "\n". Prefer explicit escaping: "\\n".


In rc line 22:
    MSG="${MSG}It means that an unforeseen error took place in\n"
  ^-- 
SC1117: Backslash is literal in "\n". Prefer explicit escaping: "\\n".



In rc line 23:
    MSG="${MSG}${i},\n"
    ^-- SC1117: Backslash is literal in "\n". Prefer 
explicit escaping: "\\n".



In rc line 24:
    MSG="${MSG}which exited with a return value of ${error_value}.\n"
^-- SC1117: Backslash is literal in "\n". Prefer explicit escaping: "\\n".


In rc line 26:
    MSG="${MSG}If you're able to track this error down to a bug in one 
of\n"

^-- SC1117: Backslash is literal in "\n". Prefer explicit escaping: "\\n".


In rc line 27:
    MSG="${MSG}the files provided by the ${DISTRO_MINI} book,\n"
     ^-- SC1117: 
Backslash is literal in "\n". Prefer explicit escaping: "\\n".



In rc line 28:
    MSG="${MSG}please be so kind to inform us at ${DISTRO_CONTACT}.\n"
^-- SC1117: Backslash is literal in "\n". Prefer explicit escaping: "\\n".


In rc line 38:
    if [ ! -f ${i} ]; then
  ^-- SC2086: Double quote to prevent globbing and word 
splitting.



In rc line 43:
    if [ ! -x ${i} ]; then
  ^-- SC2086: Double quote to prevent globbing and word 
splitting.



In rc line 51:
    if [ -z $interactive ]; then
    ^-- SC2086: Double quote to prevent globbing and word 
splitting.



In rc line 52:
   ${1} ${2}
    ^-- SC2086: Double quote to prevent globbing and word 
splitting.



In rc line 57:
   read -p "Run ${1} ${2} (Yes/no/continue)? " -n 1 runit
   ^-- SC2162: read without -r will mangle backslashes.


In rc line 63:
     ${i} ${2}
  ^-- SC2086: Double quote to prevent globbing and word 
splitting.



In rc line 73:
     ${i} ${2}
  ^-- SC2086: Double quote to prevent globbing and word 
splitting.



In rc line 84:
[ -r /etc/sysconfig/rc.site ] && source /etc/sysconfig/rc.site
  ^-- SC1091: Not following: 
/etc/sysconfig/rc.site was not specified as input (see shellcheck -x).



In rc line 104:
if [ ! -d /etc/rc.d/rc${runlevel}.d ]; then
   ^-- SC2086: Double quote to prevent globbing and 
word splitting.



In rc line 105:
    log_info_msg "/etc/rc.d/rc${runlevel}.d does not exist.\n"
   ^-- SC1117: 
Backslash is literal in "\n". Prefer explicit escaping: "\\n".



In rc line 109:
if [ "$runlevel" == "6" -o "$runlevel" == "0" ]; then IPROMPT="no"; fi
     ^-- SC2166: Prefer [ p ] || [ q ] as [ p -o q ] 
is not well defined.



In rc line 113:
    [ -r /etc/sysconfig/console ] && source /etc/sysconfig/console
     ^-- SC1091: Not following: 
/etc/sysconfig/console was not specified as input (see shellcheck -x).



In rc line 117:
if [ "${IPROMPT}" == "yes" -a "${runlevel}" == "S" ]; then
    ^-- SC2166: Prefer [ p ] && [ q ] as [ p -a 
q ] is not well defined.



In rc line 129:
    wcol=$(( ( ${COLUMNS} - ${wlen} ) / 2 ))
   ^-- SC2004: $/${} is unnecessary on arithmetic variables.
    ^-- SC2004: $/${} is unnecessary on 
arithmetic variables.



In rc line 130:
    icol=$(( ( ${COLUMNS} - ${ilen} ) / 2 ))
 

Re: [lfs-support] Boot scripts: request for comments

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 3/20/21 10:44 AM, Pierre Labastie wrote:


Anyway, I hope you are now convinced that the right command for testing script
status is:
if ! check_script_status; then continue; fi


I agree with the syntax, but have a problem with the name.  What are we 
checking the script status for?  complete? error?  Perhaps


if is_valid_script; then continue; fi

I'll note that I wrote the original function, including the name, but DJ 
modified the function.


  -- Bruce
--
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] Boot scripts: request for comments

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 3/18/21 1:32 PM, Scott Andrews wrote:

Although the init-functions and rc scripts currently run properly, what
you propose below is a bit cleaner.

I'll note that the scripts were initially written to be posix compatible 
(no bashisms) and changing that is a different discussion.  That's not
correctly implemented in the rc, console, ifup, and ifdown scripts 
because of the use of == for comparisons.



example follows.

remove SCRIPT_STAT from init-functions

Correctly write check_script_status in rc

function check_script_status {


'function' is not posix compatible.  It's not in any current script.


local script=${1}
SCRIPT_STAT="0"
if [ ! -f ${script} ]; then
log_warning_msg "${script} is not a valid file."
SCRIPT_STAT=retval="1"


The = sign in scripts is overloaded.  Is it a comparison or an 
assignment?  I've never seen the above in a script before, although it 
is used in C/C++.  We should not use it in a script.



fi
if [ ! -x ${script} ]; then
log_warning "${script} is not executable."
SCRIPT_STAT=retval="1"


as above


fi
return
}

#   Check script for file and executable
check_script_status
if [ "1" = ${SCRIPT_STAT} ]; then continue; fi

That fixes the issue but I would rewrite check_script_status to
return true or false then then do this

function check_script_status {


as above


local script=${1}
local retval="0"
if [ ! -f ${script} ]; then
log_warning_msg "${script} is not a valid file."
retval="1"
fi
if [ ! -x ${script} ]; then
log_warning "${script} is not executable."
retval="1"
fi
[ "0" = ${retval} ] && return 0 || return 1
}

if [ check_script_status ]; then continue; fi

or simply

[ check_script_status ] || continue


I prefer the more specific:

[ check_script_status = 0 ] || continue

From a style standpoint, there should always be an explicit test when 
using [ ].


  -- Bruce

--
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] Boot scripts: request for comments

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 3/18/21 11:21 AM, Scott Andrews wrote:


I am presently looking at and working on the LFS boot scripts.
They are in my opinion very rough state.

I am going to clean them up and use the following format for all of
the individual scripts that will be used on my systems as follows:

Shebang line:   #!/bin/bash
Comment Title block:the purpose of the script
Global variables:   defined here
Local variables:not defined in functions
Source scripts: all outside scripts sourced here
Functions:  all functions defined here
Mainline:   main body
Cleanup:any cleanup that needs to be done
Exit:   script terminates

I will add comments to explain the goal/purpose of the script and also
what each function does. I am going to rewrite some of the scripts so
they will be self sufficient as possible.

I will add ipv6 support using a service file much like ivp4-static.
This should allow ipv6 to be used on both dual stacked systems and
system that are ipv4 or ipv6 only.

I am also going to build to test them before placing them onto my
working servers.

Is there any interest by LFS on doing this or am I just wasting my
time posting here?


What you propose seems to be mostly documentation, but other changes may 
be appropriate.  I suggest you do a couple and let us review them. 
Then, with constructive feedback, the rest of the LFS scripts.


I'll note though that you are the only one giving feedback and the 
scripts have only had minor changes since at least 2011.


  -- Bruce


--
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 10.1 bombing at Linux kernel stage

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 3/11/21 10:18 PM, Brian Hagen wrote:

Hello, all
     I have been through the LFS 10.1 build twice with the same results.
It goes all the way through without apparent flaw until the kernel build
at 10.3.1. Then it bombs out with the following:

-

scripts/extract-cert.c:21:25: fatal error: openssl/bio.h: No such file
or directory
  #include 
  ^
compilation terminated.
make[1]: *** [scripts/extract-cert] Error 1
make: *** [scripts] Error 2

-

     The first attempt also registered missing "ncurses" files. When I
went back to section 8.28.1 to compile them, it appeared to go well.
Still, the files did not show up when and where needed at 10.3.1.
Attempts to rebuild OpenSSL did not work; apparently the environment was
not correct.

     I was fastidious about making notes that each section had been done,
marking them off on a written sheet to be certain that no sections had
been omitted. Also, near the end, when there is supposed to be a user
'tester' taken out of the system, apparently no user "tester' was
anywhere to be found.

     I don't want to just go back and start all over because that would
only recreate the same results at section 10.3.1.

     One element I find odd is that it appears that the make menuconfig
and make defconfig sections are rather puzzling as to which one needs to
be run first.


For #include , you should have /usr/include/openssl/. 
That directory should have bio.h and about 100 other .h files.  Are you 
sure yo installed openssl?


The user tester should be created in section 7.6. Creating Essential 
Files and Symlinks.  If you did not run the tests, then it is not needed 
but we do recommend running th etests for at least gcc where it is used. 
 It is also used for running tests for six other packages.


Run defconfig first.  That sets up a default configuration for your 
system.  Then use menuconfig to edit the configuration.


  -- Bruce

--
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] The Korean translation of the project has been completed.

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 3/8/21 11:34 AM, Jongmin Kim wrote:

It is based on the stable version 9.1 and available with html,
html-nochunk and pdf version.
I posted it on my github:
https://github.com/NuttyJamie/LinuxFromScratch-for-Korean. I'm
planning to update to the 10.1 stable version soon.

So I would appreciate it if you could also append a Korean translation
link on the website. It is translated by Jongmin Kim.

If I'm posting on the wrong list, I apologize for off-topic.
But actually I had asked on the lfs-website list, got no answer. I
couldn't get anyone's attention. :P
I followed the license marking of the translation project exactly
according to the original, but if there are any more regulations that
I have to follow, please let me know.


Thank you.  I have added the website to the page at 
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/read.html


  -- Bruce

--
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 and BLFS Version 10.1 are released

[Bruce Dubbs]

The Linux From Scratch community is pleased to announce the release of 
LFS Version 10.1, LFS Version 10.1 (systemd), BLFS Version 10.1, and 
BLFS Version 10.1 (systemd).


This release is a major update to both LFS and BLFS.

The LFS release includes updates to glibc-2.33, and binutils-2.36.1. A 
total of 40 packages have been updated. Changes to text have been made 
throughout the book. The Linux kernel has also been updated to version 
5.10.17.


The BLFS version includes approximately 1000 packages beyond the base 
Linux From Scratch Version 10.0 book. This release has over 850 updates 
from the previous version in addition to numerous text and formatting 
changes.


Thanks for this release goes to many contributors.  Notably:

Douglas Reno
Pierre Labastie
Ken Moffat
Thomas Trepl
Tim Tassonis
Xi Ruoyao
DJ Lucas

You can read the books online[0]-[3], or download[4]-[7] to read locally.

Please direct any comments about this release to the LFS development
team at lfs-...@linuxfromscratch.org or blfs-...@linuxfromscratch.org. 
Registration for the mailing lists is required to avoid junk email.


  -- Bruce Dubbs
 LFS

[0] http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/10.1/
[1] http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/10.1/
[2] http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/10.1-systemd/
[3] http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/10.1-systemd/

[4] http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/downloads/10.1/
[5] http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/downloads/10.1/
[6] http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/downloads/10.1-systemd/
[7] http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/downloads/10.1-systemd/
--
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-10.1-rc1 is released

[Bruce Dubbs]

The Linux From Scratch community announces the release of LFS Version
10.1-rc1. It is a preliminary release of LFS-10.1.

The Linux From Scratch community announces the release of LFS Version 
10.1-rc1. It is a preliminary release of LFS-10.1. Major changes include 
toolchain updates to binutils-2.36.1 and glibc-2.33. In total, 40 
packages were updated since the last release. Changes to the text have 
also been made throughout the book. The Linux kernel has also been 
updated to version 5.10.17.


We encourage all users to read through this release of the book and test
the instructions so that we can make the final release as good as possible.

You can read the book online [0], or download [1] to read locally.

In coordination with this release, a new version of LFS using the 
systemd package is also being released. This package implements the 
newer systemd style of system initialization and control and is 
consistent with LFS in most packages.


You can read the systemd version of the book online [2], or download [3]
to read locally.

   -- Bruce

[0] http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/10.1-rc1/
[1] http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/downloads/10.1-rc1/
[2] http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/10.1-systemd-rc1/
[3] http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/downloads/10.1-systemd-rc1/
--
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] how to find out grub boot path

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 2/19/21 9:02 AM, Thomas Seeling wrote:

Hallo,


is it possible to query the "breadcrumb" of a grub boot process?
Is there a query function that I can use to find out how my system got
bootstrapped?



Use a single boot partition and install grub to use that.


I can understand the rationale and the bigger picture for the recommendation 
but I'd like to better understand the inner workings of grub.
This is the main reason why I asked.

I'm doing devops for lots of machines where I can't change the boot layout (big 
company, policies, governance etc.).
Most of them really have 2 partitions (similar to the concept of Android A/B 
emmc layout).
I want to find out the boot process breadcrumb to be sure where things are 
getting installed to.


The problem is the way grub finds it's cfg file and modules.  If the 
systems use msdos partition tables, the location is buried in the first 
31.5 KB of raw disk sectors.  If it is using GPT, it is in the BIOS boot 
partition which is usually a 1 MB raw/unformatted partition.


I believe there is a capability to set a chainloader in the default cfg 
file.  See 
https://www.gnu.org/software/grub/manual/grub/html_node/Chain_002dloading.html, 
but I've never used it.


  -- Bruce

--
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] how to find out grub boot path

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 2/17/21 3:56 PM, Scott Andrews wrote:

On Wed, 17 Feb 2021 22:04:06 +0100
Thomas Seeling  wrote:


Hallo,


is it possible to query the "breadcrumb" of a grub boot process?

Say I have multiple partitions, e.g. /dev/sda1, /dev/sda5, /dev/sda6,
with different LFS versions.

When booting grub chooses grub.cfg from the partition that ran the
last grub-install command (e.g. /dev/sda1).

But: if I choose manually to boot from e.g. /dev/sda5, it would still
have used the grub.cfg from /dev/sda1, and if I wanted to change boot
parameters I'd have to edit /dev/sda1 grub.cfg.

Is there a query function that I can use to find out how my system got
bootstrapped?

stay healthy,
Thomas
--
Do you wanna be a legend or a passing footprint on the sands of time?


Use a single boot partition and install grub to use that.
Then copy the kernel from each partition to into the boot partition.
Edit the grub menu.


Yes, See the Caution at 
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/development/chapter10/kernel.html


For multiple instances, this is a much cleaner solution.

Also see 
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/development/chapter02/creatingpartition.html 
where we recommend a separate /boot partition.


  -- Bruce
--
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] Compile error glibc2.33 -> binutils-2.36.1

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 2/11/21 8:38 AM, Ken Moffat wrote:

On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 11:17:27AM +0100, Pierre Labastie wrote:

On Thu, 2021-02-11 at 12:28 +0800, Xi Ruoyao wrote:

On 2021-02-10 21:57 -0500, Jean-Marc Pigeon wrote:


[snip]


And, this issue seems "fixed" in 5.11-rc7 so I think the kernel dev
may have
some idea of it.


Looks like
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=44f6a7c0755d8dd453c70557e11687bb080a6f21


fixes it (at least with Ken's configuration). I've applied this patch
to 5.10.13 tree (I had also to download the skl_dmc_ver1_27.bin
firmware to /lib/frimware/i915 to allow the build with Ken's config).

Pierre


Pierre, thanks for finding the patch.  After I'd gone to bed it
occurred to me that I would need to download earlier 5.11-rc kernels
to find which one fixed it, and then do a reverse bisect to find
which commit fixed it (the logic of that always makes me even more
confused than normal), so many thanks for saving me that confusion!

I've now applied that to 5.10.15-rc1 and confirmed it builds and
boots.  Gotta go out right now for provisions, will use my other
mail to inform the relevant people that this fixes builds with
binutils-2.36.1 when I get back.


The 5.10.15 kernel is now out, but I can confirm that the patch above 
has NOT been incorporated.


Do we know when 5.11 will be released?  We are scheduled to go into 
package freeze on Sunday, but if it is not fixed yet, I think we should 
wait for it.


  -- Bruce

--
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] Compiling M4 on GCC 10.2

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 2/10/21 7:16 AM, Viktor Engelmann wrote:

Am 09.02.2021 um 16:46 schrieb Xi Ruoyao:

On 2021-02-09 16:11 +0100, Viktor Engelmann wrote:

Hello everyone,

I'm building LFS 10.0 on a fully updated Manjaro Linux on an x86_64 for
x86_64.

When I compile M4 (chapter 6.2), I get two errors:

  - gcc complains about a void function ("fault_handler") being declared
as "pure" in line 146 of m4.c
  - gcc complains about the flag -Wabi which is deprecated and doesn't do
anything

(see the attached log file)

I was able to circumvent the problems by setting the environment variable
CFLAGS=" -fpermissive -Wabi=11 " before ./configure, but I think that
these are infact bugs
in M4, so gcc is rightfully complaining.

It seems that an older gcc version had failed if that function was NOT
declared "pure"
and the M4 team has also discussed this topic in july 2020, see
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/cgi-bin/namazu.cgi?query=fault_handler&submit=Search%21&idxname=bug-m4&max=20&result=normal&sort=score
they had also decided to make the function NOT "pure" (because
fault_handler has sideeffects
and should therefore not be pure). This was implemented by commit
74915227e245c2f93d0db1ff3c53544d8f594dfa in the m4 git repository, but
the declaration
is still present in the .tar.xz from 2016 on http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/m4/
that is used in LFS.

I verified that LFS and LFS_TGT are set and that I'm compiling with
x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu-gcc.
Everything before M4 was built as regular user.

Those warnings should not be enabled by default.

Is your M4 tarball has the same MD5 checksum in the book?  Or did you use some
configure options not mentioned by the book?


Yes, I have compared all the MD5 sums. I followed the book very closely
and I have just compared my scripts to the book again and rebuilt again.
Everything else from chapter 5 and 6 worked fine.

The only thing I can think of that I (might) have done differently is
that I deleted the gcc-10.2.0 directory between building gcc and
libstdc++. The book doesn't explicitly say whether you should do that


Yes it does.  Section III, Important Preliminary Material, iii. General 
Compilation Instructions, second Important block, item 3e.




and my script deletes target-directories before untaring to prevent
conflicts with previous builds (so the gcc directory is deleted because
libstdc++ is extracted to the same directory as gcc, because it comes
from the same tarball)

In the end, the function /is/ declared as pure and that /is/ logically
wrong, so it's correct of gcc to at least issue a warning. A warning is
also arguable when you pass a deprecated parameter such as -Wabi. It
seems that the warnings are turned into errors because -Werror is also
passed somewhere - I'm still looking into where that happens. But I
would argue that you should use -Werror whenever possible to avoid
unwanted results as much as possible.


-Werror should never be included in released packages.  If you don't use 
exactly the same tools as the developer, then the odds of a problem rise 
significantly.  This is is especially true if the developer uses 
something like gcc-10.1 and we use gcc-10.2.


  -- Bruce


--
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] Compile error glibc2.33

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 2/7/21 9:52 PM, Ken Moffat wrote:

On Mon, Feb 08, 2021 at 11:14:22AM +0800, xry...@mengyan1223.wang wrote:

Please help me to test my glibc workaround in this thread. If it works,
crt1.o should have no "needed" ISA markers (even x86-64-baseline should
not be there). Then we can add it as a note in the book.
If it was on binutils sid, it should be diagnosticed already in the
editors' builds. We use -march in GMP and libffi so their test suites
would immediately fail, if it was a binutils issue.
I think it's not glibc devs, just other packagers or distro maintainers
like us thought it was a binutils issue. I actually left a wrong comment
in the BZ. No way to delete it :(.
Sorry again for the bad formatting on my phone.


Thanks for reminding me of that workaround, I'd lost sight of it. To
quote you from upthread -

| You can turn off ISA marker with "libc_cv_include_x86_isa_level=no".
| Just append it to glibc configure line, like:

../configure --prefix=/usr\
  --disable-werror \
  --enable-kernel=3.2  \
  --enable-stack-protector=strong  \
  --with-headers=/usr/include  \
  libc_cv_slibdir=/lib libc_cv_include_x86_isa_level=no


Just a minor tweak.  I had to read this closely to understand it:

../configure --prefix=/usr\
  --disable-werror\
  --enable-kernel=3.2 \
  --enable-stack-protector=strong \
  --with-headers=/usr/include \
  libc_cv_slibdir=/lib\
  libc_cv_include_x86_isa_level=no

  -- Bruce

--
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] Problem with grub and patch to dev.

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 2/7/21 8:11 AM, Pierre Labastie wrote:

On Sun, 2021-02-07 at 14:15 +0100, Pierre Labastie wrote:

On Sun, 2021-02-07 at 13:38 +0100, Frans de Boer wrote:

LS,

Finally had a change to finish the LFS build. Alas, the grub-
install
reported the old error "Decompression is too big".
Here is the solution to add to the section to compile grub:

# Patch gentpl.py to avoid an error from grub-mkinstall
"Decompressor
is
too big"
# Source:
https://www.mail-archive.com/grub-devel@gnu.org/msg29840.html
#
sed -i -E "s@(.*-R .note.gnu.gold-version -R)(.*)@\1
.note.gnu.property
-R\2@" gentpl.py
ln -fs /usr/bin/python3 /usr/bin/python  # grub needs 'python'
./autogen.sh
rm -f /usr/bin/python



Very interesting, thanks! There are several hundreds of commits in
grub
repositories since the last release. I hope we'll see a release
soon...

For us, instead of running autogen, can't the generated file be
patched
directly? I looks like gentpl.py generates Makefile.*.am, and my
guess
is that this ends up in Makefile.*.in after running autofu...

Will look more closely


Yes this can be simplified to (sorry for format, need to fit into 80
chars per line):
sed -i -E \
"s@(.*-R .note.gnu.gold-version -R)(.*)@\1 .note.gnu.property -R\2@" \
  Makefile.in grub-core/Makefile.in


I think it can be made shorter:

"/(version -R)/s/\1 .note.gnu.property -R/"

But not tested.

  -- Bruce




before running configure. Results:
- without the sed, after make:
--
$ ls -l grub-core/lzma*
-rwxr-xr-x 1 pierre pierre  4972  7 févr. 15:01 grub-
core/lzma_decompress.image
-rwxr-xr-x 1 pierre pierre 134479612  7 févr. 15:01 grub-
core/lzma_decompress.img
--
- with the sed, after make:
--
$ ls -l grub-core/lzma*
-rwxr-xr-x 1 pierre pierre 4972  7 févr. 15:09 grub-
core/lzma_decompress.image
-rwxr-xr-x 1 pierre pierre 2848  7 févr. 15:09 grub-
core/lzma_decompress.img
--

If nobody speaks up, will add that tomorrow to grub page.

Pierre



--
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] Problem with grub and patch to dev.

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 2/7/21 7:15 AM, Pierre Labastie wrote:

On Sun, 2021-02-07 at 13:38 +0100, Frans de Boer wrote:

LS,

Finally had a change to finish the LFS build. Alas, the grub-install
reported the old error "Decompression is too big".
Here is the solution to add to the section to compile grub:

# Patch gentpl.py to avoid an error from grub-mkinstall "Decompressor
is
too big"
# Source:
https://www.mail-archive.com/grub-devel@gnu.org/msg29840.html
#
sed -i -E "s@(.*-R .note.gnu.gold-version -R)(.*)@\1
.note.gnu.property
-R\2@" gentpl.py
ln -fs /usr/bin/python3 /usr/bin/python  # grub needs 'python'
./autogen.sh
rm -f /usr/bin/python



Very interesting, thanks! There are several hundreds of commits in grub
repositories since the last release. I hope we'll see a release soon...


Soon is relative.  I follow the grub mailing list and a release is still 
several months away.


  -- Bruce

--
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] Compile file 5.39 (dev)

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 2/4/21 2:50 PM, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 04/02/2021 21:21, Pierre Labastie wrote:

On Thu, 2021-02-04 at 20:03 +0100, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 04/02/2021 16:22, Scott Andrews wrote:

On 2/4/21 9:14 AM, Frans de Boer wrote:

The new instructions for compiling file-5.39 in the first phase,
are
incomplete. As it turns out, you can only compile file when the
configure command is augmented with '--disable-libseccomp'. The
file
$LFS/usr/include/libseccomp/seccomp.h does not exist yet, cause
to
halt compilation with the message that seccomp.h is missing.

--- Frans.


That should exist as it should have been installed in LFS-10.0
5.4.1.

BTW I am not a fan of the new "building system" as it takes
excessive
liberties about overwriting things



No, what is installed is /usr/include/seccomp.h, not the one what is
needed.

I think this need some clarification on your side: when did you get
that missing include? When compiling the first pass of file (in build),
or the second pass?

In the first pass, you depend on what is on the host, it's a "normal"
compilation on host. It may be that seccomp.h is missing on the host,
some -dev or -devel package is not installed. I've never seen that
before.

In the second pass, you depend on what is in $LFS, and yes seccomp.h is
installed in 5.4.1 (see last line of the instructions):  usr/include
(no /, so relative to the kernel build dir) is copied recursively to
$LFS/usr.

Pierre



Pierre,

As stated above, it happens in the first pass.
I have on the host both /usr/include/seccomp.h and 
/usr/include/libseccomp/seccomp.h.


However, on the LFS side we only have the first one. And since the first 
pass is compiled with the LFS includes, it stands to reason that it 
actually needs the ../libseccomp/seccomp.h on the LFS side.
I did not tried to make a link as such to see if that was really the 
case. This is, because it is only a temporary creation of 'file' where 
the seccomp sandbox is of no consequence.


I am OK with the changes to omit seccomp, but when building on an LFS 
10.0 system, there were no problems before.


  -- Bruce
--
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-bootscripts-20210113 mountfs

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 1/31/21 12:44 PM, Scott Andrews wrote:
I have been going through the boot scripts and cleaning them up and I 
came across this jewel...


BTW it would be helpful to use some kind of standard in all the boot 
scripts, blfs included


mountfs ${failed} is undefined/not defined

case "${1}" in
     start)    log_info_msg "Remounting root file system in read-write 
mode..."

         mount --options remount,rw / >/dev/null
         evaluate_retval
         # Remove fsck-related file system watermarks.
         rm -f /fastboot /forcefsck
         # Make sure /dev/pts exists
         mkdir -p /dev/pts
         # This will mount all filesystems that do not have _netdev in
         # their option list.  _netdev denotes a network filesystem.
         log_info_msg "Mounting remaining file systems..."
         mount --all --test-opts no_netdev >/dev/null
         evaluate_retval
         exit ${failed}



This statement is not needed as failed is not set anywhere.


You are right, what should be there is:

mount --all --test-opts no_netdev >/dev/null || failed=1

If 'failed' is unset, then it is ignored so in the case where everything 
is OK,  it really does not matter, but we could initialize it to zero.


  -- Bruce

--
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] Odp: lfs-support Digest, Vol 1406, Issue 1

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 1/28/21 2:18 PM, Jakub Drozd wrote:
Hi, I see that you are still confused with my replies. I don't know why 
it is formatted in some " instead of ", because it is not my problem, 
when I see in my sent messages in my inbox, I see normal plain text. So, 
to avoid confusion, I will send my original message in a .txt attachment.
Second, you see that I had not created the build directory as the docs 
had said to me. I also had not created the directory in the Binutils 
compilation.
Last, how to start again compiling and installing everything? I would 
appreciate for help


As root:
Move /mnt/lfs/sources out of the /mnt/lfs directory.
rm -rf /mnt/lfs/*  (or umount /mnt/lfs and mkfs.ext4 /dev/sd??)
Move the sources back to /mnt/lfs/

su - lfs
cd /mnt/lfs/sources
Restart at Chapter 5.

  -- Bruce


--
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] linux 5.5.9: shutdown -h hangs on detaching cdrom

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 1/27/21 11:32 AM, Stephen Berman wrote:

On Fri, 10 Apr 2020 22:29:13 +0200 Stephen Berman  
wrote:


I've built current development LFS using jhalfs and when I invoke (via
sudo or logged in as root) `shutdown -h now', the system appears to hang

[...]

On Sun, 26 Apr 2020 00:33:42 +0200 Stephen Berman  
wrote:


I've completed the bisection of the mainline kernel between the good
v5.1 and the bad v5.2, and here's the result:

6d25be5782e482eb93e3de0c94d0a517879377d0 is the first bad commit
commit 6d25be5782e482eb93e3de0c94d0a517879377d0
Author: Thomas Gleixner 
Date:   Wed Mar 13 17:55:48 2019 +0100

 sched/core, workqueues: Distangle worker accounting from rq lock

[...]

On Mon, 27 Apr 2020 09:58:58 +0200 Stephen Berman  
wrote:


On Mon, 27 Apr 2020 03:45:13 -0400 Michael Shell  wrote:


On Sun, 26 Apr 2020 23:53:12 +0200
Stephen Berman  wrote:


As noted in my reply to Ken, I couldn't cleanly revert the commit in
recent mainline or stable kernel sources.



If it were me, in this case, I would even consider manually editing
the code. It might come to that to find out exactly where the problem
is.


I wanted to do that, but half of the hunks of the patch failed to apply,
and in at least one case a function was changed that no longer exists,
at least under the name occurring in the patch, so trying to disentangle
this is not straightforward, at least for someone like me who's not
familiar with the code.


In anycase, please do report this issue to the kernel developers
and do let us know if you ever find out what the problem was.


Will do.


I did so last May 1, and that began an exchange on the linux kernel
mailing list with one of the kernel hackers, Sebastian Siewior (see
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/87bln7ves7@gmx.net/).  He was able to
diagnose the problem as being due to ACPI too aggressively mandating
polling of a temperature sensor on my motherboard, causing workers to
pile up, which need to be flushed on shutdown, but because there are so
many, it appears to hang (or just take a very long time).  By June 16 he
found a workaround: to increase the polling interval from 1 to 30
seconds by adding this to the kernel commandline on booting the system:

thermal.tzp=300

With this `shutdown -h now' again promptly powered off my machine, as it
did with earlier unaffected kernels.  (I was also contacted by someone
who had the same problem and found my post to the LFS support list, and
it turned out we have very similar motherboards: I have Gigabyte Z390 M
Gaming Rev. 1001 and he has Gigabyte Z390 Designare rev 1.0.  He
confirmed that the workaround worked for him too.)

Subsequently an ACPI hacker, Rafael Wysocki, started looking for a real
fix, and on January 14, found it
(https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/3391226.KRKnzuvfpg@kreacher/).  I applied
the patch to my local mainline kernel 5.11.0-rc4+ and confirmed that it
fixes the hang.

The patch was committed to the linux-next integration testing tree on
January 25
(https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/commit/drivers/acpi/thermal.c?h=next-20210127&id=81b704d3e4674e09781d331df73d76675d5ad8cb)
and should appear in the mainline kernel shortly.


Very interesting.  Thanks for the report.

  -- Bruce

--
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] stopping point in LFS 10.0 at section 8.23

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 1/23/21 10:56 PM, Brian Hagen wrote:

     In an LFS 10.0 build, I was at section 8.23, which compiles the
Acl-2.2.53 package. During the first step, (./configure), it reached the
point listed as "checking for getxattr in -lattr... no". Then it halted
with the message "FATAL ERROR: could not find a valid Extended
Attributes library. Install the extended attributes (attr) development
package. Alternatively, run "make install-lib" from the attr source."
[end of message ] [return to prompt]

     Typing "make install-lib" returned an error that there is no
Makefile. Sensible enough, but I did so to see the results. I had
carefully validated the host system requirements at the start of the
project; all were in order. Searching online for clues, I found
references to xattr, but not attr. At this point, I would like to just
leave the project in a halted state until I can find an answer.
Everything else so far has gone flawlessly.


Do you have, in chroot:

/lib/libattr.so.1 -> libattr.so.1.1.2448
/lib/libattr.so.1.1.2448
/usr/lib/libattr.so -> ../../lib/libattr.so.1.1.2448

If not, go back and rebuild attr-2.4.48. You may have missed the last 
two instructions on that page.


  -- Bruce
--
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] xg++: error: unrecognized command-line option '-funconfigured-libstdc++-v3' when compiling GCC 1st pass

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 1/13/21 7:46 AM, coolnodje wrote:

Is http://linuxfromscratch.org quite slow or is it just me? I have a lot 
of timeouts getting pages, started at when I encountered the bug, roughly.


It is slow.  Try one of the mirrors.  We are working on a major upgrade 
to the server.


  -- Bruce

--
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] xg++: error: unrecognized command-line option '-funconfigured-libstdc++-v3' when compiling GCC 1st pass

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 1/13/21 7:23 AM, coolnodje wrote:



Interesting.  Can you do 'su -' to become root?

I haven't set a root pwd, but `sudo su -` works fine


What are the ownership and permissions of /home/lfs/,
/home/lfs/.bash_profile, and /home/lfs/.bashrc ?

All standard, I believe, respectively:
755 lfs:lfs

644 lfs:lfs
644 lfs:lfs



Did you set the lfs user's password?

I did


After becoming user lfs, what is the output from running 'set'?

well, using `su lfs` and then sourcing `~/.bash_profile` it is:


> BASH_VERSINFO=([0]="5" [1]="0" [2]="3" [3]="1" [4]="release"

[snip]


The idea of Section 4.4 is to create a very austere environment. Did
you see the Important note in Section 4.4?  Does /etc/bash.bashrc
exist on your host?


I did have to rename /etc/bash/bashrc on Debian, I suspected it could
cause problem as it seems to do a couple important things. But it's not it.


It looks like everything is OK, but Pierre has figured out that the 
problem is a version of bash that is too old in debian stable. As he 
said, the workaround is to use fg when becoming user lfs.  The complete 
solution is to use Debian testing.


I'll note that earlier versions of Debian stable worked fine.  Your 
version is bash-5.0.3.  That is the third patch to bash-5.0.  We know 
the proper fix is in bash-5.0.11 and bash-5.1.


  -- Bruce
--
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] xg++: error: unrecognized command-line option '-funconfigured-libstdc++-v3' when compiling GCC 1st pass

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 1/12/21 1:37 PM, coolnodje wrote:

GCC compilation went well after fixing PATH from .bashrc


But oddly the problem when using `su - lfs` comes from .bash_profile, 
containing
|exec env -i HOME=$HOME TERM=$TERM PS1='\u:\w\$ ' /bin/bash| as defined 
in the book.


Using `su lfs` then cd home and `source .bash_profile` or executing 
manually `exec env -i HOME=$HOME TERM=$TERM PS1='\u:\w\$ ' /bin/bash` 
both works.


Bash version is
GNU bash, version 5.0.3(1)-release (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)

The error goes like this:

root@LFSDebian:~# su - lfs

[3]+  Stopped su - lfs


Interesting.  Can you do 'su -' to become root?

What are the ownership and permissions of /home/lfs/, 
/home/lfs/.bash_profile, and /home/lfs/.bashrc ?


Did you set the lfs user's password?

After becoming user lfs, what is the output from running 'set'?

The idea of Section 4.4 is to create a very austere environment. Did you 
see the Important note in Section 4.4?  Does /etc/bash.bashrc exist on 
your host?


  -- Bruce

--
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] xg++: error: unrecognized command-line option '-funconfigured-libstdc++-v3' when compiling GCC 1st pass

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 1/8/21 11:25 AM, Don Cross wrote:



On Fri, Jan 8, 2021 at 11:32 AM Bruce Dubbs <mailto:bruce.du...@gmail.com>> wrote:


On 1/8/21 7:36 AM, coolnodje wrote:
 >  > Please do not top post to the mailing list.
 > I'm not quite sure I understand what you mean.


As a fellow gmail user, it helps to point out that Google makes it 
almost certain that new people will top-post. It's really not our fault. 
It's hard for us gmail users to notice the "..." at the bottom of the 
email, then to know that we are supposed to click on it, then we are 
supposed to go to the bottom of the newly-expanded text, and type our 
reply THERE. We don't even *know* we are top-posting due to the user 
interface Google provides.


Yes, it is a problem when using gmail via the web.  Better mail clients 
allow you to choose.  For instance, in Thunderbird, you can go to


Edit->Account Settings -> (account) Composition & Addressing

and select 'When quoting, "start my reply below the quote"'.

I keep wondering if it would be possible to adjust whatever software 
manages these mailing lists and implement a simple anti-top-posting 
feature... could it automatically reformat top-posts to be bottom-posts? 
I am a software developer, and I hereby volunteer to help if I can. I 
just don't know who has the authority here to support such a change.


Top posting is fine for 1-on-1 messages.  Mailing lists are a different 
environment. When many users are commenting and comments are posted in 
line to specific comments, it can get confusing when people top post to 
those replies.


As the footer shows, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style for 
a longer discussion.


Another issue is that posts should be edited to remove parts of a 
message that are not relevant to a reply.  Unfortunately many users just 
blindly include everything.


  -- Bruce


--
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] xg++: error: unrecognized command-line option '-funconfigured-libstdc++-v3' when compiling GCC 1st pass

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 1/8/21 7:36 AM, coolnodje wrote:

 > Please do not top post to the mailing list.
I'm not quite sure I understand what you mean.


Well, you could read the footer:

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?


I copy pasted from HTML version, double checked before executing, and 
besides binutils compilation ran fine.


OK.


Here's the result from version-check.sh:


[snip]

Looks good.  Just checking if something was missed.  I see gcc is 8.3.0 
and that's fine.


I may be wrong but I think the error indicates that it /doesn't 
recognize/ the flag `--disable-libstdcxx`


Anyway I copy pasted the configure flags from the manual, and i 
double checked, it was included in the configure directive.


Now remove the gcc directory and re-extract it.  Run the commands in the 
book again through configure, but after the configure line add '> c.log' 
 If there is an error message on the screen, post that here.  If 
necessary we will ask you to post c.log to www.hasebin.com and send us 
the generated link.


Also make sure you are doing the above as user lfs: 'su - lfs'

  -- Bruce
--
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] xg++: error: unrecognized command-line option '-funconfigured-libstdc++-v3' when compiling GCC 1st pass

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 1/8/21 4:32 AM, coolnodje wrote:

Thanks for your answer.

I may be wrong but I think the error indicates that it /doesn't 
recognize/ the flag `--disable-libstdcxx`


Anyway I copy pasted the configure flags from the manual, and i double 
checked, it was included in the configure directive.


Please do not top post to the mailing list.

What is the output from the version-check.sh script?

Also, where are you copying from?  Do not copy from the .pdf file if you 
are using that.  It does not copy the backslash/end-of-line sequence 
properly.


  -- Bruce

--
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] first boot on 9.1

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 12/31/20 7:53 PM, Ken Moffat wrote:

On Thu, Dec 31, 2020 at 05:55:57PM -0600, Brian Hagen wrote:

Hello,

     Re the comments from Ken and Bruce, first, thank you for them. I
will quote here from LFS 9.1, section 2.4.1.4 comments on partitioning:

===

/boot – Highly recommended. Use this partition to store kernels and
other booting information. To minimize potential boot problems with
larger disks, make this the first physical partition on your first disk
drive. A partition size of 100 megabytes is quite adequate.

===

     So, although I read this during the previous LFS 9.1 processes,
since it states "highly recommended", not mandatory, I did not use it.


If something can be avoided, it is not manadatory - no matter what
pain avoiding it may cause (for me, see my aversion to gtk-doc).

The difference with LFS is that we do not support upgrading an
existing LFS system (although people have done that) - every binary
distro I am aware of will upgrade in-place, similarly in gentoo and
its derivatives you can 'make world'.

I've been here a long time, and on occasion I've had a machine
without a separate /boot partition - but I think the last one was a
mac powerpc64 (not officially supported) with 64-bit kernel and
32-bit userspace (unlike cross-lfs, which supported that
architecture but wanted to use either pure64 (i.e. all 64-bit) or
multilib.  The last time I tried to boot that machine, the 3.10
kernel was still in Long Term Support (but was poor for a
single-core ppc64), so my experience is by no means current, but it
could be made to work and I've seen nothing since then which forces
builders to separate /boot.


After all, I have never seen a Linux distro install that requires that
type of setup. I have installed numerous ones from CD/DVD, and having
/dev/sda1 or /dev/hda1 (as the case may be) designated as "/" was always
adequate.



We think that for LFS it still is, but you need to adapt
instructions where appropriate - like Bruce said in relation to
grub.cfg.


     So, does this mean that going through LFS without having /boot as
the first partition on the first drive basically dooms the grub-install
sequences to a useless result? I would really like to know.

Brian



I think that one one of my machines I've had separate /boot without
it being the first partition (ISTR that machine had been used for
some version of windows, and then that objected when I upgraded the
hardware - so sda1 on a DOS-style disk, and probably sda2, were for
windows and sda5 or later was used for /boot.  On gpt disks, the
partiitoning is of course different (a 'spacer' partition at the
start marked as 'bios boot' or something like that).

If your whole system is on sda1 on a DOS disk, I think you have to
point grub to /boot/vmlinuz-something whereas on a separate /boot
partition the location is just vmlinuz-something.  But also,
specifying the root affects where grub is looking.  So, in the
LFS-9.1 section 8.4.4 there are settings for LFS on sda2 without a
separate /boot partiiton -

insmod ext2 (so that grub can read ext2|3|4 partitions)
set root=(hd0,2) (partition 2, counting from 1, of first disk
(counting from 0)
root=/dev/sda2 - passed to the kernel after grub loads it, telling
it where to look for /sbin/init.

In your case with LFS on sda1, I think you need
  set root=(hd0,1)
  root=/dev/sda1


I agree with you Ken, but there is one caveat.  If there is more than 
one drive, sometimes the kernel and grub do not agree that hd0 is sda. 
It's not frequent, but I have seen that, especially if the drives are 
different interface types e.g. sata, usb, or the newer nvm devices for 
some ssd drives.


The best way to figure that out is to start the grub command line and 
run ls.


Personally, I think the best approach is to not use a MSDOS partition 
table and use GPT instead.  When using GPT, grub needs a special 
grub-bios partition that is not formatted.


For instance I have:

Number  Start (sector)End (sector)  Size   Code  Name
   120484095   1024.0 KiB  EF02  grub
   24096 1052671   512.0 MiB   8300  boot
   3 105267239456767   18.3 GiB8300  lfs-7.9
   43945676860428287   10.0 GiB8300  lfs-20180801
... etc

Note that the Name field is for humans.  grub doesn't care.  It only 
knows (hd0,1), (hd0,2), (hd1,12) etc.


When using this type of setup the kernel recognizes the PARTUUID 
parameter.  No initrd is needed.  Therefor the linux line in grub can be 
something like:


linux /vmlinuz-5.6.14 root=PARTUUID=AA22639D-4BE3-4E99-9FF5-2AA2A8F76BFC 
  ro


You can get the uuid from fdisk using the 'i' (info) command for a 
partition.  Also note that this is NOT the filesystem UUID, but the 
partition UUID.


Overall, the boot process is pretty complex.  It depends on the hw of 
the drives (and can use a network connection in a diskless environment), 
the disk layout, and can be tricky i

Re: [lfs-support] first boot on LFS 9.1

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 12/30/20 12:50 PM, Ken Moffat wrote:

On Tue, Dec 29, 2020 at 10:04:19PM -0600, Brian Hagen wrote:

Hello:

     After numerous passes to reach the finish line on LFS 9.1, I got a
working system installed. The prompt reads "-bash-5.0#". However, the
grub installer did not go well. It presents a message "WELCOME TO
GRUB!", and then goes nowhere. Only a reboot regains control.

     I was able to access the new LFS system by using a System Rescue CD
version 7.01. It has a menu option with a utility named "findroot". That
utility searches for partitions that have an init function and lists
them. Choosing the new LFS partition brings up a login prompt. Once
logged in, I could see that the new LFS system is working. It can ping
LAN and WAN IP addresses. However, without a workable ftp or sftp
facility, I am not certain how to add more networking capabilities.



Using ftp nowadays is uncommon - many public sites for source code
have stopped using ftp.  You probably want a browser, certificates
for https:// (make-ca in BLFS), curl and wget.

Since you have other machines on your lan, if you have usb on this
machine you could download things on another machine, write them to
a usb stick (you might beed to format it as ext4 or ext2, depending
on your kernel options) and plug it in once you are in the LFS
system.


     I hesitated to make any changes during the LFS steps starting with
section 8.3.1 and "make defconfig". There are so many options there that
I did not change anything; only verified the stated steps. I would like
to figure out what went wrong with the grub-install process. It appears
that the kernel is operating just fine. With a good GRUB creation
procedure, the entire 9.1 LFS creation process can be a success.

     Comment is invited.

Brian



Rather than write 'systemrescuecd' several times, I've used 'SRCD'
in my comments.

For the kernel, 'make defconfig' is only a starting point - you need
to know what hardware you are running, the drivers it uses (on a
distro, lspci will provide much of this information and I guess SRCD
probably has that.  Also lsmod, although distro modules tend to
include things you don't usually need in LFS).  From memory,
something like 'lspci -VV | less' to see the hardware and the
drivers it is using.

I still have no idea what is wrong with your grub install, and I
suppose it is possible that the defconfig does not provide all the
required drivers for your hardware (or alternatively, it made tham
as modules), but that sort of thing usually only shows up *after*
grub starts to boot your kernel.

All I can suggest for grub is that you look at the Arch wiki in your
favourite browser - there is a lot there for grub, and yes, the
detail is hard and some of it might be contradictory.  If you are
able to browse that from one machine while trying to use grub to
boot the LFS machine you might be able to make progress.

But perhaps the easiest solution (who knows, it might work, and
probably nothing lost if it doesn't) is to boot to the LFS system
from SRCD, check that the disk is showing up as /dev/sda, and then
rerun 'grub-install /dev/sda'.  You will need /dev /proc /sys to be
mounted for that, I've never used 'findroot', perhaps it has already
mounted all three.  If not, from another SRCD tty bind them to
wherever the LFS system is mounted (ISTR SRCD reserves /mnt for its
own use but lets you create directories beneath it - from the second
SRCD tty 'mount' should show everything including where the LFS
system is.


The problem with grub is that it depends on the host system.  If /boot 
is not a separate partition, then it is on the host OS partition and 
difficult to get to from LFS.  (You have to mount the initial OS 
partition to get to it.)


If you installed grub with grub-install within chroot without a separate 
/boot partition, then it probably is looking at the LFS partition's 
/boot directory.  You should have /boot/grub/grub.cfg, but if you just 
copied what is in LFS, then you don't get the option of booting to the 
original host OS.  The kernel and initrd for that will be on a different 
partition from the LFS system.


Note also that the grub.cfg file in LFS has to be customized for the 
actual LFS partition used (set root=(hdx,y); root=/dev/
--
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] adding / configuring a VLAN

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 12/17/20 11:32 AM, iw3...@arcor.de wrote:



On December 17, 2020 at 6:03 PM Bruce Dubbs  wrote:


On 12/17/20 10:24 AM, iw3...@arcor.de wrote:

Hi all,

recently I read some docs about adding and configuring VLANs under linux.
It seems actually pretty simple, with something like:

# ip link add link eth0 name eth0.100 type vlan id 100

you get a eth0.100 virtual network device and then you can further configure it
just like any other physical one.

Now I'm wandering if there is a standard way to add such virtual devs in a 
lfs/blfs
system; I could not find any reference to vlan in the boot scripts.


You would need to create a custom boot script for that.

-- Bruce


Hi,

thank you for confirming that.

Maybe it could also be possible to add a VLAN=yes flag to 
/etc/sysconfig/ifconfig...
and use it in the network init scripts (/sbin/ifup).


There is nothing stopping you from adding anything to the ifconfig 
files.  They are just bash variable assignments.


  -- Bruce
--
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] adding / configuring a VLAN

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 12/17/20 10:24 AM, iw3...@arcor.de wrote:

Hi all,

recently I read some docs about adding and configuring VLANs under linux.
It seems actually pretty simple, with something like:

# ip link add link eth0 name eth0.100 type vlan id 100

you get a eth0.100 virtual network device and then you can further configure it
just like any other physical one.

Now I'm wandering if there is a standard way to add such virtual devs in a 
lfs/blfs
system; I could not find any reference to vlan in the boot scripts.


You would need to create a custom boot script for that.

  -- Bruce

--
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] Rebooting section 11.3

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 12/14/20 12:54 PM, James Read wrote:



On Mon, Dec 14, 2020 at 6:34 PM Bruce Dubbs <mailto:bruce.du...@gmail.com>> wrote:


On 12/14/20 12:14 PM, James Read wrote:
 > Hi,
 >
 > I am having difficulty with booting my LFS system. I modified my
 > existing grub.cfg to include the following:
 >
 > menuentry "GNU/Linux, Linux 5.8.3-lfs-10.0" {
 >          linux   /boot/vmlinuz-5.8.3-lfs-10.0 root=/dev/sda1 ro
 > }
 >
 > The menu entry is included in the GRUB screen when I reboot but
when I
 > select LFS to boot it cannot find the image. What have I missed?

Is /boot a separate partition?  If so, then remove /boot from the linux
line.  Otherwise run 'ls -lh /boot' to ensure vmlinuz-5.8.3-lfs-10.0
exists and looks like it is about the right size (probably inthe
5-10 MB
range).


I copied the image to /boot on the host system and I was able to boot. 
Partially. Now the boot process gets stuck with this message:


[     1.148228] ---[ end Kernel panic - not syncing: VFS: Unable to 
mount root fs on unknown-block(0,0) ]---



Note that /dev/sda1 is probably not correct if you also have another
distro on the first drive.


What is the output of 'fdisk /dev/sda' ?  Which is your LFS partition?

  -- Bruce

--
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] Rebooting section 11.3

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 12/14/20 12:14 PM, James Read wrote:

Hi,

I am having difficulty with booting my LFS system. I modified my 
existing grub.cfg to include the following:


menuentry "GNU/Linux, Linux 5.8.3-lfs-10.0" {
         linux   /boot/vmlinuz-5.8.3-lfs-10.0 root=/dev/sda1 ro
}

The menu entry is included in the GRUB screen when I reboot but when I 
select LFS to boot it cannot find the image. What have I missed?


Is /boot a separate partition?  If so, then remove /boot from the linux 
line.  Otherwise run 'ls -lh /boot' to ensure vmlinuz-5.8.3-lfs-10.0 
exists and looks like it is about the right size (probably inthe 5-10 MB 
range).


Note that /dev/sda1 is probably not correct if you also have another 
distro on the first drive.


  -- Bruce
--
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] Section 3.1 Problems dowloading packages to sources directory

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 12/13/20 6:41 AM, James Read wrote:

I am working on Ubuntu and am having problems with the following command:

wget --input-file=wget-list --continue --directory-prefix=$LFS/sources

It generates lots of errors of the type:

--2020-12-13 12:27:57-- 
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/patches/lfs/10.0/kbd-2.3.0-backspace-1.patch
Connecting to www.linuxfromscratch.org  
(www.linuxfromscratch.org 
)|2600:3c01::f03c:91ff:fe70:25e8|:80... 
connected.

HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK
Length: 12640 (12K) [text/x-diff]
/home/yaakov/LFS/sources/kbd-2.3.0-backspace-1.patch: Read-only file system

Cannot write to ‘/home/yaakov/LFS/sources/kbd-2.3.0-backspace-1.patch’ 
(Read-only file system).


I tried the same command with sudo and still got the same errors.


How is the lfs partition mounted?

  mount | grep LFS

should give something like:

  /dev/ on  /home/yaakov/LFS type ext4 (rw,noatime,discard)

If it does not say rw, then you need to remount the directory read/write.

  -- Bruce
--
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 9.1 sticking point at section 8.3 -- first steps in kernel build

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 11/15/20 10:42 PM, Brian Hagen wrote:

Hello:

I have progressed all the way to the kernel-build stage (8.3) in LFS 
9.1. All went well to this point. The document states that
the first step is to run "make defconfig". It fails with the following message:
---
root@brian-T3408:/mnt/lfs/sources/linux-5.5.3#  make defconfig
   HOSTCC  scripts/basic/fixdep
   HOSTCC  scripts/kconfig/conf.o
   HOSTCC  scripts/kconfig/confdata.o
   HOSTCC  scripts/kconfig/expr.o
   LEX scripts/kconfig/lexer.lex.c
/bin/sh: flex: command not found




scripts/Makefile.host:9: recipe for target 'scripts/kconfig/lexer.lex.c' failed
make[1]: *** [scripts/kconfig/lexer.lex.c] Error 127
Makefile:568: recipe for target 'defconfig' failed
make: *** [defconfig] Error 2
---

[ I have the /bin/sh value set to bash as required. (I learned the hard way that 
the "dash" that is a native element of this host system
does not work.) I re-checked, and it is currently set properly. ]


That is only needed in Chapter 5.  By the time you get to chapter 8, you 
are way beyond that.



 I searched for the "flex" command and got this:

root@brian-T3408:/mnt/lfs/sources/linux-5.5.3#  whence flex
whence: command not found
---


There is 'whence' in LFS.



Before this 8.3 section, the instructions suggested replacing numerous files in 
the "/etc" directory. Looking at them, I
decided that the existing ones should be sufficient. Is that a mistake on my 
part? If I cannot resolve the error messages
in the "make defconfig" procedure, I cannot advance to the next steps. I have 
looking online for FAQ's and such to
check into kernel-build LFS failure and found nothing useful.


You did not get flex installed properly (Section 6.33).  I suggest you 
go back and reinstall.  Are you building the kernel in chroot?  The 
issues above suggest that you are not.


  -- Bruce



--
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] Make -k test failed - on 8.18. Binutils-2.35

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 10/23/20 12:51 PM, Hideo wrote:

El vie., 23 oct. 2020 a las 18:58, Bruce Dubbs
() escribió:


On 10/23/20 11:28 AM, Hideo wrote:

Dear Team,

I have this error when run a make -k check:

PASS: test-strtol-0.
PASS: test-strtol-1.
PASS: test-strtol-2.
PASS: test-strtol-3.
PASS: test-strtol-4.
PASS: test-strtol-5.
PASS: test-strtol-6.
PASS: test-strtol-7.
PASS: test-strtol-8.
PASS: test-strtol-9.
PASS: test-strtol-10.
PASS: test-strtol-11.
PASS: test-strtol-12.
PASS: test-strtol-13.
PASS: test-strtol-14.
PASS: test-strtol-15.
PASS: test-strtol-16.
PASS: test-strtol-17.
PASS: test-strtol-18.
PASS: test-strtol-19.
PASS: test-strtol-20.
make[3]: Leaving directory '/sources/binutils-2.35/build/libiberty/testsuite'
make[2]: Leaving directory '/sources/binutils-2.35/build/libiberty'
make[1]: Target 'check-host' not remade because of errors.
make[1]: Nothing to be done for 'check-target'.
make[1]: Leaving directory '/sources/binutils-2.35/build'
make: *** [Makefile:2238: do-check] Error 2
make: Target 'check' not remade because of errors.


That does not tell us anything.  We need to see what failed in order to
help.  Did you log the output of the tests?  There should be several
places like:

Testsuite summary for gold 0.1

# TOTAL: 277
# PASS:  277
# SKIP:  0
# XFAIL: 0
# FAIL:  0
# XPASS: 0
# ERROR: 0

or
  === ld Summary ===

# of expected passes2565
# of expected failures  57
# of untested testcases 1
# of unsupported tests  23

or just look for FAIL somewhere for a specific test.

-- Bruce
--
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



Hello,

Checked logs, and see this messages, on gold folder the result it's OK:

===
gold 0.1: ./test-suite.log


# TOTAL: 4
# PASS:  4
# SKIP:  0
# XFAIL: 0
# FAIL:  0
# XPASS: 0
# ERROR: 0

.. contents:: :depth: 2

but the next one (ld) it shows:


 === ld Summary ===

# of expected passes2564
# of unexpected failures1
# of expected failures  57
# of untested testcases 1
# of unsupported tests  23
Executing on host: ./ld-new --version  /dev/null ld.version (timeout = 300)
spawn [open ...]
GNU ld (GNU Binutils) 2.35
Copyright (C) 2020 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This program is free software; you may redistribute it under the terms of
the GNU General Public License version 3 or (at your option) a later version.
This program has absolutely no warranty.
./ld-new 2.35

Searching for error messages on ld.log, saw this error repeated:

collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status


In chroot, do you have /dev/null ?  From the above that's about the only 
thing I can think of without digging into the test details.  The output 
you have is proper for './ld-new --version'


  -- Bruce



--
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] Make -k test failed - on 8.18. Binutils-2.35

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 10/23/20 11:28 AM, Hideo wrote:

Dear Team,

I have this error when run a make -k check:

PASS: test-strtol-0.
PASS: test-strtol-1.
PASS: test-strtol-2.
PASS: test-strtol-3.
PASS: test-strtol-4.
PASS: test-strtol-5.
PASS: test-strtol-6.
PASS: test-strtol-7.
PASS: test-strtol-8.
PASS: test-strtol-9.
PASS: test-strtol-10.
PASS: test-strtol-11.
PASS: test-strtol-12.
PASS: test-strtol-13.
PASS: test-strtol-14.
PASS: test-strtol-15.
PASS: test-strtol-16.
PASS: test-strtol-17.
PASS: test-strtol-18.
PASS: test-strtol-19.
PASS: test-strtol-20.
make[3]: Leaving directory '/sources/binutils-2.35/build/libiberty/testsuite'
make[2]: Leaving directory '/sources/binutils-2.35/build/libiberty'
make[1]: Target 'check-host' not remade because of errors.
make[1]: Nothing to be done for 'check-target'.
make[1]: Leaving directory '/sources/binutils-2.35/build'
make: *** [Makefile:2238: do-check] Error 2
make: Target 'check' not remade because of errors.


That does not tell us anything.  We need to see what failed in order to 
help.  Did you log the output of the tests?  There should be several 
places like:


Testsuite summary for gold 0.1

# TOTAL: 277
# PASS:  277
# SKIP:  0
# XFAIL: 0
# FAIL:  0
# XPASS: 0
# ERROR: 0

or
=== ld Summary ===

# of expected passes2565
# of expected failures  57
# of untested testcases 1
# of unsupported tests  23

or just look for FAIL somewhere for a specific test.

  -- Bruce
--
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 and BLFS Version 10.0 are released

[Bruce Dubbs]

The Linux From Scratch community is pleased to announce the release of 
LFS Version 10.0, LFS Version 10.0 (systemd), BLFS Version 10.0, and 
BLFS Version 10.0 (systemd).


This release is a major update to both LFS and BLFS.

The LFS release includes updates to glibc-2.31, and binutils-2.34. A 
total of 35 packages have been updated. A new package, zstd-1.4.4, has 
also been added. Changes to text have been made throughout the book. The 
Linux kernel has also been updated to version 5.5.3.


The BLFS version includes approximately 1000 packages beyond the base 
Linux From Scratch Version 9.1 book. This release has over 840 updates 
from the previous version in addition to numerous text and formatting 
changes.


Thanks for this release goes to many contributors.  Notably:

Douglas Reno
DJ Lucas
Ken Moffat
Thomas Trepl
Pierre Labastie
Tim Tassonis
Xi Ruoyao

You can read the books online[0]-[3], or download[4]-[7] to read locally.

Please direct any comments about this release to the LFS development
team at lfs-...@linuxfromscratch.org or blfs-...@linuxfromscratch.org. 
Registration for the mailing lists is required to avoid junk email.


  -- Bruce Dubbs
 LFS

[0] http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/10.0/
[1] http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/10.0/
[2] http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/10.0-systemd/
[3] http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/10.0-systemd/

[4] http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/downloads/10.0/
[5] http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/downloads/10.0/
[6] http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/downloads/10.0-systemd/
[7] http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/downloads/10.0-systemd/
--
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-10.0-rc1 is released

[Bruce Dubbs]

The Linux From Scratch community announces the release of LFS Version
10.0-rc1. It is a preliminary release of LFS-10.0.

This version of the book has undergone a major reorganization.  It uses
enhanced cross-compilation techniques and an environment isolated from 
the host system to build tools for the final system. This reduces both 
the chance for changing the the host system and the potential of the 
host system influencing the LFS build process.


Major changes include toolchain updates to binutils-2.35, gcc-10.2.0, 
and glibc-2.32. In total, 37 packages were updated since the last 
release. Changes to the text have also been made throughout the book. 
The Linux kernel has also been updated to version 5.8.1.


We encourage all users to read through this release of the book and test
the instructions so that we can make the final release as good as possible.

You can read the book online [0], or download [1] to read locally.

In coordination with this release, a new version of LFS using the 
systemd package is also being released. This package implements the 
newer systemd style of system initialization and control and is 
consistent with LFS in most packages.


You can read the systemd version of the book online [2], or download [3]
to read locally.

   -- Bruce

[0] http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/10.0-rc1/
[1] http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/downloads/10.0-rc1/
[2] http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/10.0-systemd-rc1/
[3] http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/downloads/10.0-systemd-rc1/
--
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. 9.1 - Tcl-8.6.10 (Section 5.11) dependencies

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 7/17/20 12:31 AM, Theodore Planinsek wrote:

Hello all,

I'm writing only after checking the FAQS and IRC sections on 
linuxfromscratch.org .


To that end,  I've ran into (and fixed?) an apparent missed dependency 
of Tcl-8.6.10.


The issue was tclsh was segfaulting after make (close attention was 
given to the LFS v. 9.1 book). I had found that it wasn't finding Zlib. 
To my understanding, Tcl must be linked against the shared libraries in 
the "temporary system" (/tools), hence the "--prefix=/tools" passed to 
configure. However configure was not finding Zlib / Zlib headers in the 
temp system, therefore no Zlib linking happened, which caused segfault 
during dlopen in glibc.


My fix was to install Zlib (1.2.11) in the "temporary system" and tell 
configure to use gcc that was compiled for the temp system, allowing 
configure to properly search and find Zlib / Zlib headers in the temp 
system.


Does anyone know if this is a solid approach? Or was my understanding 
correct? The book did not specify Zlib in the temporary system during 
chapter 5.


When building tcl in Chapter 5 you should see:

checking zlib.h usability... no
checking zlib.h presence... no
checking for zlib.h... no

In gcc, you should see:

*** This configuration is not supported in the following subdirectories:
 zlib gnattools gotools target-libada target-libhsail-rt 
target-libphobos target-zlib target-libbacktrace target-libgfortran 
target-libgo target-libffi target-libobjc target-liboffloadmic

(Any other directories should still work fine.)

See the logs at http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/build-logs/9.1/

I think you are somehow getting the host system mixed up with the LFS tools.

  -- Bruce
--
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] IPv4 en 6

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 7/6/20 8:57 AM, Frans de Boer wrote:
I have found messages from some years ago asking about the possibility 
of giving examples how to configure LFS for use on IPv4 and IPv6. Now, 
LFS is still using the ifconfig utility including the ipconfig.xxx file. 
I found references to this utility way back in 1983, so it looks very 
much outdated.
Also, finding references of what the content of ifconfig.xxx can be, is 
very hard to find. And what has been found uses a slightly different 
syntax then using under LFS.


Is it not time to switch to the use of something more up-to-date and 
thus support IPv4 and IPv6?


Most of us still need the IPv4 protocol due to not migrated (external) 
servers, but IPv6 is also increasingly needed.


We use iproute2 in LFS.  We also install ifconfig in inetutils if you 
want to use it.  When configuring your ip address we use 
/etc/sysconfig/ipconfig.IFACE, but that is only a file name.


You can use the same scripts for ipv6, but that is a bit more complex. 
See the IPv6-in-LFS hint for that.


  -- bruce
--
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] iostream.h missing (dev v10) (SOLVED)

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 6/23/20 3:01 PM, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 2020-06-22 20:02, Frans de Boer wrote:

On 2020-06-22 14:54, Xi Ruoyao wrote:

echo "#include  | x86_64-cross-linux-gnu-g++ -E -x c++ -


Result:

# 1 ""
# 1 ""
# 1 ""
# 1 "/mnt/lfs/usr/include/stdc-predef.h" 1 3 4
# 1 "" 2
# 1 ""
:1:10: fatal error: iostream: No such file or directory
compilation terminated.

--- Frans

I have checked and checked some more times and always overlooked this 
when configuring ncurses:

--with-gxx-include-dir=$LFS/tools/$LFS_TGT/include/c++/10.1.0

I should have left '$LFS' out of it.

Sorry for the trouble, I should have known better after all these years.


Copy/paste is your friend.  Even if you are using scripts.

  -- Bruce

--
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 9.1 GMP-6.2.0 test suite

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 6/22/20 6:29 PM, Alexey Orishko wrote:

Hi all,

While building LFS 9.1 I got a problem with the description of GMP-6.2.0 
test suite results in ch.6.19. In both LFS books it is said that there 
are 190 tests, but I got 197 "PASS"es. It does not prevent me from going 
forwards, but it might be worth fixing in book description.


I don't remember 9.1, but we have 197 in the current development book.

  -- Bruce

--
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] Users cannot su in svn-20200616

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 6/17/20 9:19 AM, Ken Moffat wrote:

I've now completed, and booted, a build of the new-style LFS.  I'm
loggied in (and using ssh to write this post).  Both my normal
users (ken, lfs), as well as root can login - so the passwords are
correct.

But only root can su, so I'm not going to be able to build anything
after I've built X and run 'startx'.

If I try to su, either to root or to another user, I get:

ken@plexi /sources/scripts/lfs-dev/git$ su - lfs
Password:
su: Authentication failure

And /var/log/auth.log shows

Jun 17 14:48:04 plexi su[14069]: Authentication failed for root
Jun 17 14:48:04 plexi su[14069]: FAILED su for root by ken
Jun 17 14:48:04 plexi su[14069]: - /dev/tty2 ken:rootJun 17 14:49:10 plexi 
su[14077]: Authentication failed for root
Jun 17 14:49:10 plexi su[14077]: FAILED su for root by lfs
Jun 17 14:49:10 plexi su[14077]: - /dev/tty2 lfs:root
[...]
Jun 17 14:50:19 plexi su[14086]: Authentication failed for root
Jun 17 14:50:19 plexi su[14086]: FAILED su for root by ken
Jun 17 14:50:19 plexi su[14086]: - /dev/tty3 ken:root
Jun 17 15:01:05 plexi su[14206]: Authentication failed for lfs
Jun 17 15:01:05 plexi su[14206]: FAILED su for lfs by ken
Jun 17 15:01:05 plexi su[14206]: - /dev/tty5 ken:lfs
Jun 17 15:02:48 plexi su[14207]: Successful su for ken by root
Jun 17 15:02:48 plexi su[14207]: + /dev/tty2 root:ken

At this point I don't have PAM installed. 'su' is from shadow-4.8.1.

Looking at shadow, I've made two changes since my last successful
build:

First, I applied the change to make the first user 1000 (until now I
had omitted that)

sed -i 's/1000/999/' etc/useradd

Second, I changed the sed to force SHA512 to match the book (just
reformatting) and git shows the following for my change:

-sed -i -e 's@#ENCRYPT_METHOD DES@ENCRYPT_METHOD SHA512@' \
-   -e 's@/var/spool/mail@/var/mail@' etc/login.defs 2>$KM_LOG
+sed -e 's@#ENCRYPT_METHOD DES@ENCRYPT_METHOD SHA512@' \
+-e 's@/var/spool/mail@/var/mail@' \
+-i etc/login.defs 2>$KM_LOG

I'm at a loss to know where I should be looking.  Any suggestions,
please ?


I'm still a little behind you.  I have not built PAM yet, but have you 
rebuilt shadow after PAM?


  -- Bruce

--
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] Util-linux-2.35.2

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 6/8/20 5:11 PM, Flareon Zulu wrote:
In building util-linux in ch 5 of the dev book, it wanted me to supply 
--build, --target, and --host. I used $LFS_TGT to make it happy on all 
three, but has anyone else had this come up?


That should not be needed.  You must be doing something different from 
what is in the book, but you have not provided enough information for us 
to help.


$ echo $PATH
$ whoami
$ ls -a ~

may be a start.

What are the error messages?

Are you doing a copy/paste?  If so, are the lines ending in a backslash 
followed by any blank characters?


  -- Bruce

--
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] SIGFPE not generated by raise

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 6/7/20 10:35 AM, Ken Moffat wrote:

On Sun, Jun 07, 2020 at 03:43:30PM +0100, Ken Moffat wrote:

Finally replying to this:

I did use that system for a fresh build, but the sigfpe problem was
present in the tests for both bash and check (building from xorg).

Then I booted the latest system (last night) and the check tests
succeeded.

Today I've been running the check tests at various places.  All
succeeded until (and including) completing my build of xorg.

But I've now rebooted and run startx (with fluxbox, elogind and
rxvt-unidoe) : the check tests FAIL.  I've been seeing this since we
first started to use 'check' a couple of years ago (at that point
I'd given up on trying to understand the bash tests, but looking
back I was getting the sigfpre failure then, so the common features
are startx (that was suid xorg in those days), and rxvt-unicode
(in those days I'll have been using icewm when building the next
system).

I'll reboot in a minute to retry without xorg and rxvt-unicode.



In fact I just closed X and used a tty - tests passed.

So, I've been looking in the wrong place, it's embedded perl in
rxvt-unicode: google found
http://lists.schmorp.de/pipermail/rxvt-unicode/2013q3/001839.html

and earlier in that thread was the link to the still-open issue
at perl: https://github.com/Perl/perl5/issues/12349


The issue has been around since 2001 ??!!

Perhaps it's time for you to use another terminal emulator.

  -- Bruce
--
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 Bootscripts MD5

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 6/4/20 9:49 PM, flareonz...@gmail.com wrote:
Can someone verify the correct MD5 for lfs-bootscripts-20191031.tar.xz? 
The stable book has a value starting with “e”, the development book has 
a value starting with 9, and manually calculating gets a value starting 
with “d”. I’m not sure which one to be looking at.


e9249541960df505e4dfac0c32369372 is correct for
lfs-bootscripts-20191031.tar.xz in the download directory.

The differences you may see otehr places are really just timestamp 
differences.


  -- Bruce


--
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] DEV: Text and code do not match

[Bruce Dubbs]

And this required you to argue with one of the top developers on
this project? I personally think you should apologize, but that's
on you.

Flareon Zulu




Sorry, but because it is top developer I should refrain from any
comment? In what world are you living?

Frans


The world of "be polite to everyone and don't start arguments." If you 
just want arguments, you are in the wrong field.


Flareon


Technical discussions and even disagreements are just fine. The problems 
occur (not in this thread) when personal comments are used.


And as a side note, please remove non-relevant material from replies.

  -- Bruce


--
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] SIGFPE not generated by raise

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 5/26/20 11:43 PM, Xi Ruoyao wrote:

On 2020-05-26 18:17 +0100, Ken Moffat wrote:

I'm trying to discover why two tests in the testsuite for 'check'
always fail for me.  I've now got a response that the tests raise
SIGFPE but do not receive it.  The example is

ken@plexi ~/check-debug $cat test.c
#include 

#include 


int main() {

   printf("Before\n");

   raise(SIGFPE);

   printf("After\n");

   return 0;

}

followed by gcc test.c ; ./a.out

That should terminate on the signal, but for me it doesn't:

ken@plexi ~/check-debug $./a.out
Before
After


However, if I try a division by zero I do get the exception:

ken@plexi ~/check-debug $cat divbyzero.c
#include 

#include 


int main() {

  int a = 1000;
  int z = 0;
  int result;

   printf("Before\n");

   //raise(SIGFPE);
   result = a / z;

   printf("After\n");

   return result;

}

gcc -o divbyzero divbyzero.c

ken@plexi ~/check-debug $./divbyzero
Before
Floating point exception


Any clues to how I can find what is causing this breakage, please ?
It seems to happen on all my machines.


If SIGFPE is somehow masked by sigprocmask, this phenomenon would happen.  The
SIGFPE raised by raise() will be masked, but the SIGFPE produced by 1/0 is still
undefined behavior (on x86_64 Linux normally "as if" a SIGFPE is received).

And, the signal mask set with sigprocmask is inherited during fork() and
preserved during exec().  So if your shell or init process masked SIGFPE for
some reason (intentionally or mistakenly) this will happen.

Try to examine the signal mask:

#include 
#include 

int main()
{
sigset_t ss;
sigprocmask(SIG_BLOCK, NULL, &ss);
if (sigismember(&ss, SIGFPE))
puts("oops! SIGFPE is masked!");
else
puts("SIGFPE is not masked.");
return 0;
}


Nice code Xi.  When I ran this I got 'SIGFPE is not masked'.  And when I 
ran Ken's code, I got:


Before
Floating point exception

Ken sometimes does unusual things, but I'll note on 'man 7 signal' there 
is a section:


BUGS
There  are  six signals that can be delivered as a consequence of a 
hardware exception: SIGBUS, SIGEMT, SIGFPE, SIGILL, SIGSEGV, and 
SIGTRAP.  Which of these signals is delivered,  for  any  given 
hardware  exception, is not documented and does not always make

sense.

I note that FPE stands for Floating Point Exception, but Ken is doing an 
integer divide.  It could be a HW architecture issue.


  -- Bruce

--
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] SIGFPE not generated by raise

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 5/26/20 12:17 PM, Ken Moffat wrote:

I'm trying to discover why two tests in the testsuite for 'check'
always fail for me.  I've now got a response that the tests raise
SIGFPE but do not receive it.  The example is

ken@plexi ~/check-debug $cat test.c
#include 

#include 


int main() {

   printf("Before\n");

   raise(SIGFPE);

   printf("After\n");

   return 0;

}

followed by gcc test.c ; ./a.out

That should terminate on the signal, but for me it doesn't:

ken@plexi ~/check-debug $./a.out
Before
After


However, if I try a division by zero I do get the exception:

ken@plexi ~/check-debug $cat divbyzero.c
#include 

#include 


int main() {

  int a = 1000;
  int z = 0;
  int result;

   printf("Before\n");

   //raise(SIGFPE);
   result = a / z;

   printf("After\n");

   return result;

}

gcc -o divbyzero divbyzero.c

ken@plexi ~/check-debug $./divbyzero
Before
Floating point exception


Any clues to how I can find what is causing this breakage, please ?
It seems to happen on all my machines.


I think SIGFPE can be turned on and off by writing a control word to the 
CPU.  Are you using an intel or amd cpu?


  -- Bruce

--
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] Kernel Error

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 5/26/20 5:36 AM, Greekforce1821 wrote:
Hello again! , I am experiencing some kind of errors in my bootable 
kernel. As you can see in the photo, when I reached the end of the guide 
and shutdown -r now the system, the kernel loaded but there were some 
kind of errors  about root. How can I fix this?


What is the content of the / line in /etc/fstab?

  -- Bruce

--
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] Test failures in vim-8.2.0486 with gcc-10.

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 5/24/20 12:27 AM, Ken Moffat wrote:

On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 04:11:53AM +0100, Ken Moffat wrote:


This is LFS r11848 cross-chap5 branch from 13th May and I'm trying
to understand why tests fail (although I don't always achieve any
understanding).

So, I gave vim's tests another try, but they failed somewhat badly:

Executed:  2667 Tests
  Skipped:47 Tests
   FAILED: 3 Tests


[snip]


I didn't have any older versions of vim handy, but looking at the
9.1 book we were using vim-8.2.0190, so I downloaded that.  With
gcc-10.1.0 it too fails, although not quite as badly:

Executed:  2407 Tests
  Skipped:49 Tests
   FAILED: 1 Tests


Failures:


[snip]



I'di then taken a look at fedora, who are using 8.2.0806 with
gcc-10.1, although I don't think they run vims testsuite.  Latest
when I looked was 8.2.0814.  That too appears to take for ever to
run its tests, eventually ending similarly to 8.2.0716.


For me, vim-8.2.0814 tests take 120 seconds in chroot on a virgin LFS build.

I think I did run down the tests hanging problem.  We have a 
configuration in /etc/bashrc where we have:


source $VIMRUNTIME/defaults.vim
let skip_defaults_vim=1

If I remove /etc/vimrc, all tests pass without the hang.  That is the 
way a user would build in a normal LFS build.


  -- Bruce
--
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] Test failures in vim-8.2.0486 with gcc-10.

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 5/24/20 12:27 AM, Ken Moffat wrote:

On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 04:11:53AM +0100, Ken Moffat wrote:


This is LFS r11848 cross-chap5 branch from 13th May and I'm trying
to understand why tests fail (although I don't always achieve any
understanding).

So, I gave vim's tests another try, but they failed somewhat badly:

Executed:  2667 Tests
  Skipped:47 Tests
   FAILED: 3 Tests


Failures:
 From test_excmd.vim:
 Found errors in Test_redir_cmd():
 function RunTheTest[40]..Test_redir_cmd line 20: command did not fail: 
redir! > Xfile
 From test_help.vim:
 Found errors in Test_helptag_cmd():
 function RunTheTest[40]..Test_helptag_cmd line 20: command did not 
fail: r-xr--r--
 function RunTheTest[40]..Test_helptag_cmd line 31: command did not 
fail: -w---
 From test_quickfix.vim:
 Found errors in Test_switchbuf():
 function RunTheTest[40]..Test_switchbuf line 131: Expected 'split' but 
got ''
 function RunTheTest[40]..Test_switchbuf line 136: Expected 'usetab' 
but got 'useopen'
 function RunTheTest[40]..Test_switchbuf line 141: Expected '' but got 
'useopen'



I didn't have any older versions of vim handy, but looking at the
9.1 book we were using vim-8.2.0190, so I downloaded that.  With
gcc-10.1.0 it too fails, although not quite as badly:

Executed:  2407 Tests
  Skipped:49 Tests
   FAILED: 1 Tests


Failures:
From test_quickfix.vim:
Found errors in Test_switchbuf():
function RunTheTest[40]..Test_switchbuf line 131: Expected 'split' but 
got ''
function RunTheTest[40]..Test_switchbuf line 136: Expected 'usetab' but 
got 'useopen'
function RunTheTest[40]..Test_switchbuf line 141: Expected '' but got 
'useopen'

Hmm, my local copy of the book shows vim is now 8.2.0716 but
I can't see that in the changelog.

And then I noticed that at some point I accidentally started running
the tests as root, which obvously isn't going to help.

With 8.2.0716 the tests run as user nobody take a very long time,
and eventually terminate, probably early, with

Flaky test failed too often, giving up
Found errors in Test_textprop_with_syntax():
Run 1:
function RunTheTest[39]..Test_textprop_with_syntax[15]..VerifyScreenDump line 58: See dump file difference: call 
term_dumpdiff("testdir/failed/Test_textprop_syn_1.dump", "testdir/dumps/Test_textprop_syn_1.dump"); difference in 
line 1: ">(+0&#ff0|a|b|c|)| @69"; difference in line 2: "|~| @73"; difference in line 6: "@57|1|,|1| 
@10|A|l@1| "
Run 2:
function RunTheTest[39]..Test_textprop_with_syntax[15]..VerifyScreenDump line 58: See dump file difference: call 
term_dumpdiff("testdir/failed/Test_textprop_syn_1.dump", "testdir/dumps/Test_textprop_syn_1.dump"); difference in 
line 1: ">(+0&#ff0|a|b|c|)| @69"; difference in line 2: "|~| @73"; difference in line 6: "@57|1|,|1| 
@10|A|l@1| "
Flaky test failed too often, giving up

I found a gentoo post along the way, about problems with gcc-10
including vim where somebody had a crash, related to vim NOT
applying its normal -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=1 because the gcc major varion
now has two digits, not one :
[ https://trofi.github.io/posts/213-gcc-10-in-gentoo.html ]

Unfortunately, my logs show that the versions of vim which I have
tried DO enable that.

I'di then taken a look at fedora, who are using 8.2.0806 with
gcc-10.1, although I don't think they run vims testsuite.  Latest
when I looked was 8.2.0814.  That too appears to take for ever to
run its tests, eventually ending similarly to 8.2.0716.

If you'll excuse my klatchian (or even if you won't!) "Sod this for
a game of soldiers!".


I grabbed a copy of vim-8.2.0814 and built it in chroot using Chapter 6 
instructions.  It did hang on me during tests.


To see what was going on, I removed the directory and 
re-extracted/re-built vim.  Then I tried:


su nobody -s /bin/bash -c "make test"

It hung again but gave a message:

VIMRUNTIME=../../runtime  ../vim -f  -u unix.vim -U NONE --noplugin 
--not-a-term -S runtest.vim test_startup.vim --cmd 'au SwapExists * let 
v:swapchoice = "e"' > /dev/null

Error detected while processing /etc/vimrc:
line4:
E484: Can't open file ../../runtime/defaults.vim
line   10:
E484: Can't open file ../../runtime/syntax/syntax.vim
Press ENTER or type command to continue

So I typed ENTER and it continued.  I got:

Executed:  2858 Tests
 Skipped:48 Tests
  Failed: 0 Tests

ALL DONE

I do have ./runtime/syntax/syntax.vim  and ./runtime/syntax/syntax.vim, 
but I don't know what directory the system was in when I got the hang.


I did have /etc/vimrc installed since I had installed vim earlier.

I suppose I can remove /etc/vimrc for the tests and try again, but that 
will have to wait until tomorrow.


  -- Bruce

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

Re: [lfs-support] Test failures in vim-8.2.0486 with gcc-10.

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 5/23/20 10:11 PM, Ken Moffat wrote:

I keep thinking I'm coming towards the end of my cross-chap5 build,
but this latest test breakage makes me wonder -

A few months ago I stopped running tests on vim after they hung all
night on one of my machines (my TERM is rxvt-unicode, in chroot I
pretend to be running xterm-color and I concluded that the term was
the problem).  Which means I have no recent data for the vim tests
on desktop machines.

This is LFS r11848 cross-chap5 branch from 13th May and I'm trying
to understand why tests fail (although I don't always achieve any
understanding).

So, I gave vim's tests another try, but they failed somewhat badly:

Executed:  2667 Tests
  Skipped:47 Tests
   FAILED: 3 Tests


Failures:
 From test_excmd.vim:
 Found errors in Test_redir_cmd():
 function RunTheTest[40]..Test_redir_cmd line 20: command did not fail: 
redir! > Xfile
 From test_help.vim:
 Found errors in Test_helptag_cmd():
 function RunTheTest[40]..Test_helptag_cmd line 20: command did not 
fail: r-xr--r--
 function RunTheTest[40]..Test_helptag_cmd line 31: command did not 
fail: -w---
 From test_quickfix.vim:
 Found errors in Test_switchbuf():
 function RunTheTest[40]..Test_switchbuf line 131: Expected 'split' but 
got ''
 function RunTheTest[40]..Test_switchbuf line 136: Expected 'usetab' 
but got 'useopen'
 function RunTheTest[40]..Test_switchbuf line 141: Expected '' but got 
'useopen'

TEST FAILURE

Tried it manually without my own CFLAGS - no change.  Tried it on
the host system (LFS r11777) from 7th March and there everything is
fine.

Executed:  2790 Tests
  Skipped:25 Tests
   Failed: 0 Tests

ALL DONE
make[2]: Leaving directory '/tmp/vim-8.2.0486/src/testdir'

At the moment, it looks as if vim's testsuite is not happy with
gcc-10 (or maybe one of the other changed packages, but gcc seems
the most likely).


Can you give the latest, vim-8.2.0814, a try.

  -- Bruce

--
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] /tmp permissions resets after reboot

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 5/6/20 12:14 AM, Bud Rozwood wrote:

Hi,

For some reason my /tmp directory keeps resetting to 0755 and I would 
have to manually resetting back to the correct permissions 1777 
everytime. I figured this out when I couldn't start my X server the 
other day and this was the issue.


I did find this question 
 that 
might be related somehow but I don't want to mess with my /etc/fstab yet 
until I know for sure that it is the issue. Could it have something to 
do with my XDG variables/confs are set up? I've attached is my fstab if 
it would help at all.


I will appreciate any help on this.



It's not your fstab. but I would change the fsck order for sda2 and 
efivarfs to zero.


From fstab it looks like you are using the system V book.

Check /etc/sysconfig/createfiles to see if anything weird is there.

Also, check ~/bash_profile, ~/.bashrc, /etc/profile, /etc/bashrc for 
chmod commands.  Also anything in /etc/profile.d.


Another thing to try is to edit  /etc/inittab and set initdefault to 1.
You can also edit /boot/grub/grub.cfg kernel line to add init=/bin/bash 
to skip all boot scripts.  You can also do the last two items via the 
grub interactive shell.


You can also edit /etc/sysconfig/rc.site and uncomment:

#IPROMPT="yes"

Then, upon boot, when the interactive startup message comes up, press 
"I".  You can then step through the boot scripts.  You may need to edit 
some boot scripts to add 'ls -ld /tmp'  temporarily to see when the 
permissions change.


  -- Bruce
--
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] Can't login - cycles back

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 4/27/20 3:12 PM, Bud Rozwood wrote:
On Monday, April 27, 2020, Bruce Dubbs <mailto:bruce.du...@gmail.com>> wrote:


On 4/27/20 3:04 PM, Bud Rozwood wrote:

Hi,

For some reason I can't login today and I am not sure why. The
prompt for username and password comes up but when I type in my
username and press enter, it occasionally prints something on
the screen but it's too fast to read and returns me back to
prompt. My /etc/issue is set to clear and print the date, but I
don't think it has something to do with that.


Display Manager or terminal?  If DM, try logging in from terminal
(Ctrl-Alt-F2)



Terminal.


Do you have openssh installed by any chance?  If so you can try to log 
in from another system.  If not, can to install openssh in chroot?


  -- Bruce
--
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] Checksum for Xorg Intel Video

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 4/26/20 4:36 PM, Bud Rozwood wrote:
On Sunday, April 26, 2020, Bud Rozwood > wrote:


Hi,

I found that the MD5 checksum doesn't match the one for the stable
BLFS for package xf86-video-intel-20200218.


Actually, I've found that it matched the .bz2 tarball instead of the .xz 
one.


It is in the errata.

  -- Bruce

--
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] Fwd: bug in /lib/lsb/init-functions

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 4/25/20 5:46 PM, Alexander Danel wrote:



-- Forwarded message -
From: *Alexander Danel* >

Date: Sat, 25 Apr 2020 at 17:33
Subject: bug in /lib/lsb/init-functions
To: >



Found a bug.  I am looking at a copy of /lib/lsb/init-functions from way 
back in 2011-10-17.


In the function

pidofproc()

Towards the end of the function

     # Figure out if all listed PIDs are running.
     for pid in ${pidlist}; do
         kill -0 ${pid} 2> /dev/null

         if [ "${?}" -eq "0" ]; then
    # A-Danel, fix bug
#lpids="${pids}${pid} "
             lpids="${lpids}${pid} "
         else
             exitstatus="1"
         fi
     done



I don't think so.  lpids is a list of pids (those in pidlist) that are 
active.  Each iteration appends to the a list (lpids) which is initially 
empty.


Please explain why you think what we have is a bug.

Also, reply to lfs-supoprt.  The patches list is not seen by very many 
people.


  -- Bruce
--
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] linux 5.5.9: shutdown -h hangs on detaching cdrom

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 4/18/20 6:30 AM, Stephen Berman wrote:

On Sat, 18 Apr 2020 03:08:46 -0400 Michael Shell  wrote:


On Wed, 15 Apr 2020 10:41:27 +0200
Stephen Berman  wrote:



Another thing to try - does the problem persist if the CDROM is
physically disconnected from the system (e.g., its SATA cable
disconnected and then the system powered up)? If the system
just hangs at some other point, then that is good evidence that
something other than the CDROM driver/SCSI system is to blame.


Thanks for the feedback.  I see if I can try your suggestions and see
what happens.


Another suggestion would be to build a problematic kernel with
CONFIG_CDROM=n to see if the issue is still present.

  -- Bruce

--
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] su: Cannot drop the controlling terminal - 6.25 GCC

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 4/12/20 10:12 AM, Thomas Trepl wrote:

Am Sonntag, den 12.04.2020, 22:01 +0800 schrieb devin operline:

Hi there,

This is my 3rd attempt at getting through LFS for the first time using (Debian 
10).  It was a fresh install when I made my second attempt.  Then hit this 
error and redid chapters 4, 5 and 6 before failing at the same place.  While 
I'd typed all commands on my 2nd try (for better absorption), I copied and 
pasted all commands this time (3rd) around

On section 6.25 - GCC, I get the following error on the make check:

su nobody -s /bin/bash -c "PATH=$PATH make -k check" =>
su: Cannot drop the controlling terminal

commands I've run based on different threads I've found usually referring to 
different sections and/or previous versions of the book (as root, within chroot)
ls -l /tools/bin/bash   =>   -rwxr-xr-x

ls -l /dev/pts =>  c- 1 root root 5, 2 Apr 12 10:22 ptmx

tty =>  not a tty

ldd /bin/bash   =>  linux-vdso.so.1
libncursesw.so.6 => not found
libdl.so.2 => /lib/libdl.so.2
libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6
/tools/lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 => /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2

ls -l /lib/{libreadline,libhistory,libncursesw,libdl,libc,ld}* =>
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root  1495440 Apr 11 14:44  /lib/ld-2.31.so
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root   10 Apr 11 14:44  /lib/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 -> 
ld-2.31.so
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 18445352 Apr 11 14:44  /lib/libc-2.31.so
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root   12 Apr 11 14:44  /lib/libc.so.6 -> libc-2.31.so
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root   179648 Apr 11 14:43  /lib/libcrypt-2.31.so
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root   16 Apr 11 14:44  /lib/libcrypt.so.1 -> 
libcrypt-2.31.so
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root   251248 Apr 11 14:43  /lib/libdl-2.31.so
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root   13 Apr 11 14:44  /lib/libdl.so.2 -> libdl-2.31.so
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root   17 Apr 11 15:51  /lib/libhistory.so.8 -> 
libhistory.so.8.0
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root   174272 Apr 11 15:51  /lib/libhistory.so.8.0
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root   18 Apr 11 15:51  /lib/libreadline.so.8 -> 
libreadline.so.8.0
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root  1092480 Apr 11 15:51  /lib/libreadline.so.8.0

i had also checked some other permissions which are mentioned in this thread, 
when I was trying to wrap my head around the controlling terminal: 
https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-from-scratch-13/su-cannot-drop-the-controlling-terminal-6-25-gcc-4175671731/

Admittedly, I still don't really understand what is going on.

Any help or suggestions would be very much appreciated!

Thank you, take care,
Al


Hi Al,

dump question, but are the virtual filesystems mounted as described in
section 6.2 ?


Indeed.  It looks like the virtual file systems are not correct.  From 
the *host*, run:


  findmnt

You should have:

TARGET SOURCE FSTYPE   OPTIONS
├─/mnt/lfs /dev/sda6  ext4 rw,noatime
│ ├─/mnt/lfs/dev   devtmpfs   devtmpfs 
rw,relatime,size=8147408k,nr_inodes=2036852,mode=755
│ │ └─/mnt/lfs/dev/pts devpts devpts 
rw,relatime,gid=5,mode=620,ptmxmode=000

│ ├─/mnt/lfs/proc  proc   proc rw,relatime
│ ├─/mnt/lfs/sys   sysfs  sysfsrw,relatime
│ ├─/mnt/lfs/run   runtmpfsrw,relatime

Some of the options for /mnt/lfs/dev and /mnt/lfs/dev/pts may differ a 
bit, but that's OK.


You should also have:

$ ls -l $LFS/var/run
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 4 Mar 31 13:53 /mnt/lfs/var/run -> /run

$ ls -l $LFS/dev/shm
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 8 Mar  4 15:00 /mnt/lfs/dev/shm -> /run/shm

  -- Bruce


--
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] linux 5.5.9: shutdown -h hangs on detaching cdrom

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 4/10/20 3:29 PM, Stephen Berman wrote:

I've built current development LFS using jhalfs and when I invoke (via
sudo or logged in as root) `shutdown -h now', the system appears to hang
while trying to detach the cdrom block device.  Here are the last two
lines printed to the terminal after issuing that command:

Bringing down the loopback interface..[OK]
sr 5:0:0:0: tag#21 timing out command, waited 120s

and every 2 minutes, the last line repeats with a different tag#.  So
far I haven't had the patience to wait more than six minutes, then I
power off the machine with the start button.  I know this is the cdrom
because on booting there are these messages:

[6.633004] scsi 5:0:0:0: CD-ROMHL-DT-ST DVDRAM GH24NSD1  LW00 
PQ: 0 ANSI: 5
[6.679083] sr 5:0:0:0: [sr0] scsi3-mmc drive: 48x/12x writer dvd-ram cd/rw 
xa/form2 cdda tray
[6.679101] cdrom: Uniform CD-ROM driver Revision: 3.20
[6.689325] sr 5:0:0:0: Attached scsi CD-ROM sr0
[6.689399] sr 5:0:0:0: Attached scsi generic sg1 type 5

In addition, the message "timing out command, waited %lus\n" comes from
the function scsi_softirq_done in linux-5.5.9/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c.

This only happens with `shutdown -h' or `shutdown -hP', not with
`shutdown -r'.  Moreover, on the same computer I also have LFS 8.4 with
kernel 4.20.12, and there `shutdown -h' works fine.  So it seems to be
an issue with kernel 5.5.9.  When I built the latter I used `make
oldconfig' with the config file of kernel 4.20.12, accepting the
defaults for all new options.  Comparing the two config files, I didn't
notice any evidently relevant difference, e.g. involving SCSI options.
I suppose it's also possible there is some other difference between LFS
8.4 and the current development version that could be involved, but I
have no idea what to look for.  Does anyone here have any ideas or
suggestions for how to track down what's causing the hang and stop it?


Since it is bringing down the loopback interface it is running the 
bootscript S90localnet properly.  The only other script is S99halt and 
that only does 'halt -d -f -i -p'.


-d Don't write the wtmp record.
-f Force halt or reboot, don't call shutdown(8).
-i Shut  down  all network interfaces just before halt or reboot.
-p When  halting  the system, switch off the power.

Try using 'poweroff' or 'init 0' and see if anything changes.  You can 
also try using an older kernel with the current build to validate that 
it is a kernel problem.


  -- Bruce


--
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] Upgrade Kernel Version

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 4/8/20 1:21 PM, Furkan İnciroğlu wrote:

On 4/7/20 2:31 AM, Furkan İnciroğlu wrote:

Hi there,

When I compiled LFS 8.4 systemd Linux kernel version was 4.20.12. I
want to upgrade kernel version to 5.5 or else. I was wondering before
doing this job, is it possible to break something in the operating
system when this upgrade is done? Because now everything works
properly, I will upgrade just kernel.


Yes you can do this easily.  Just build the new kernel with the
instructions in Chapter 8 and copy to /boot.  Then update grub.cfg with
a new menuentry and reboot.

One technique though is to copy the current running configuration into
the kernel tree as .config and run 'make oldconfig'.  It will ask
questions about new configuration items.  I usually accept the default
for those questions except for drivers.  Usually it will want to add new
drivers but if I haven't added any new HW, I answer No for those.



Thank you Bruce for you answer. I built new kernel and then copied
under boot directory and now everything works properly and I checked
cat /proc/version, it says my kernel has 5.5 version. That's perfect.
But I wonder, Why I do not need to Installation of Linux API Headers
again? Like section 5.6 and 6.7.1 in the LFS book? In my opinion, I
also need to run make headers command and copy this new kernel headers
to /usr/include directory. What would you say?


Don't do that. glibc depends on the kernel headers it was built with. 
You could make changes that will create errors that are very hard to 
find and fix.


  -- Bruce

--
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] Upgrade Kernel Version

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 4/7/20 2:31 AM, Furkan İnciroğlu wrote:

Hi there,

When I compiled LFS 8.4 systemd Linux kernel version was 4.20.12. I
want to upgrade kernel version to 5.5 or else. I was wondering before
doing this job, is it possible to break something in the operating
system when this upgrade is done? Because now everything works
properly, I will upgrade just kernel.


Yes you can do this easily.  Just build the new kernel with the 
instructions in Chapter 8 and copy to /boot.  Then update grub.cfg with 
a new menuentry and reboot.


One technique though is to copy the current running configuration into 
the kernel tree as .config and run 'make oldconfig'.  It will ask 
questions about new configuration items.  I usually accept the default 
for those questions except for drivers.  Usually it will want to add new 
drivers but if I haven't added any new HW, I answer No for those.


  -- Bruce

--
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] GCC atomic test failure

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 3/29/20 9:07 AM, Rob wrote:

In Chapter 6.25, GCC-9.2.0
We're in chroot. All else went ok, and then we have:
Running /sources/gcc-9.2.0/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/atomic/atomic.exp ...
WARNING: program timed out.
FAIL: gcc.dg/atomic/c11-atomic-exec-5.c   -O1  execution test
WARNING: program timed out.
FAIL: gcc.dg/atomic/c11-atomic-exec-5.c   -O2  execution test
A search seemed to indicate this has something to do with some kind of C
syntax problem. I am not clear, however, if this is something I should be 
worried
about.
The discussions kind of went over my head.
What do you all think?



I don't recall seeing this.  Are you on a relatively older system?  A 
timeout in a test would indicate that to me.  If that is the only 
problem you see in gcc, then you are probably OK to continue.


  -- Bruce
--
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] Linux kernel doesn't see partitions

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 3/26/20 3:03 PM, Jason Gauthier wrote:

I'm to the point where grub needs to be installed.
I've built LFS on a loopback device, so there isn't a physical drive to 
install grub to.


I booted a debian recovery disk, and I installed and configured grub.
Since I'm going to use this on a QEMU system I set the linux parameter to
"linux /boot/vmlinuz-5.5.3-lfs-9.1 root=/dev/vda1 ro"

Grub loads, and boots the kernel.  But the kernel halts because it 
cannot find the root filesystem.  Specifically, it says, "Please append 
a correct "root=" boot option; here are the available partitions:

But there aren't any partitions listed.

My grub.cfg:
set default=0
set timeout=5

insmod ext2
set root=(hd0,1)

menuentry "GNU/Linux, Linux 5.5.3-lfs-9.1" {
         linux   /boot/vmlinuz-5.5.3-lfs-9.1 root=/dev/vda1 ro
}


Appreciate any pointers.  I "feel" like the kernel might not know about 
the disk subsystem, but I didn't deviate from compilation options, and 
I've been out of the kernel compilation game for a long time so I don't 
know what's even defaulted or modular anymore.


That's a bit tricky.  grub is finding (hd0,1), but the kernel is not 
recognizing the device as vda.  My best guess is to try root=/dev/sda1, 
but it depends on the options used by qemu.


Another issue is that the kernel doe not have the right drivers 
installed.  On the debian recovery disk, look at 
/lib/modules//modules.builtin


I'll note that when I use qemu, I install a regular distro and build 
inside qemu. I do use a separate /boot partition.  I then just edit the 
distro's grub.cfg.


  -- Bruce


--
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] build time comparison

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 3/6/20 6:11 AM, Thomas Seeling wrote:

Hallo,


I did some comparing of build times.
Building was done on an older i5-6500 with 16 GB RAM, SATA harddisk and SSD.

9.1 build on SSD:
The SBU unit value is equal to 117 seconds.
Total time required to build the system:79.6  SBU

8.3 build on HD:
The SBU unit value is equal to 107 seconds.
Total time required to build the system:205.7  SBU

9.1 build on HD:
The SBU unit value is equal to 107 seconds.
Total time required to build the system:294.9  SBU


I'm not surprised about the speed difference but I wonder why the SBU is
bigger for the SSD build? I was using the same jhalfs configuration file
for the latest 9.1 build.


A long time ago I did an LFS build on a ram disk and compared the time 
to building on an actual disk.  This was before SSDs were available. 
The difference in build times was about 8.5%.


The build time in jhalfs can vary quite a bit.  For my latest reference 
build at -j1 on an ssd the time was 214 SBU at 104 seconds/SBU.


I sometimes build without tests or just a few tests and have seen times 
as low as 29 SBU at -j10 on the same system.


  -- Bruce
--
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] DBus-Broker

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 3/1/20 1:38 PM, Rob wrote:

Are we considering switching from traditional DBus to this
implementation? I'm told many distros are switching over, that this one
is faster and more efficient.
What says LFS?


We would really need a lot of testing and documentation.

What is the URL?

Faster for what?  What is slowed down with the current version?

  -- Bruce
--
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 and BLFS Version 9.1 are released

[Bruce Dubbs]

The Linux From Scratch community is pleased to announce the release of 
LFS Version 9.1, LFS Version 9.1 (systemd), BLFS Version 9.1, and BLFS 
Version 9.1 (systemd).


This release is a major update to both LFS and BLFS.

The LFS release includes updates to glibc-2.31, and binutils-2.34. A 
total of 35 packages have been updated. A new package, zstd-1.4.4, has 
also been added. Changes to text have been made throughout the book. The 
Linux kernel has also been updated to version 5.5.3.


The BLFS version includes approximately 1000 packages beyond the base 
Linux From Scratch Version 9.1 book. This release has over 840 updates 
from the previous version in addition to numerous text and formatting 
changes.


Thanks for this release goes to many contributors.  Notably:

Douglas Reno
DJ Lucas
Ken Moffat
Thomas Trepl
Pierre Labastie
Tim Tassonis
Xi Ruoyao

You can read the books online[0]-[3], or download[4]-[7] to read locally.

Please direct any comments about this release to the LFS development
team at lfs-...@linuxfromscratch.org or blfs-...@linuxfromscratch.org. 
Registration for the mailing lists is required to avoid junk email.


  -- Bruce Dubbs
 LFS

[0] http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/9.1/
[1] http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/9.1/
[2] http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/9.1-systemd/
[3] http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/9.1-systemd/

[4] http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/downloads/9.1/
[5] http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/downloads/9.1/
[6] http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/downloads/9.1-systemd/
[7] http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/downloads/9.1-systemd/
--
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] Almost ready for the 9.1 release

[Bruce Dubbs]

We are almost ready for LFS/BLFS 9.1.  All tickets are closed and all 
BLFS packages tagged as ready.  What is left is to tweak anything that 
might come up in the next couple of days.


The current development versions of both LFS and BLFS will become the 
new stable versions of the books.


Please let us know if anything needs to be updated.

The release will be on Sunday, March 1st.

  -- Bruce
--
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-9.1-rc1 is released

[Bruce Dubbs]

The Linux From Scratch community announces the release of LFS Version
9.1-rc1. It is a preliminary release of LFS-9.1.

Major changes include toolchain updates to binutils-2.34 and glibc-2.31. 
In total, 36 packages were updated since the last release. Changes to 
the text have also been made throughout the book. The Linux kernel has 
also been updated to version 5.5.3.


We encourage all users to read through this release of the book and test
the instructions so that we can make the final release as good as possible.

You can read the book online [0], or download [1] to read locally.

In coordination with this release, a new version of LFS using the 
systemd package is also being released. This package implements the 
newer systemd style of system initialization and control and is 
consistent with LFS in most packages.


You can read the systemd version of the book online [2], or download [3]
to read locally.

   -- Bruce

[0] http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/9.1-rc1/
[1] http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/downloads/9.1-rc1/
[2] http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/9.1-systemd-rc1/
[3] http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/downloads/9.1-systemd-rc1/
--
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] Build New Driver after LFS

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 2/4/20 10:47 AM, Furkan İnciroğlu wrote:

Hi there,

After my LFS-BLFS compilation, I delete all my tools and other build 
directories. Now, I have to build some driver such as igb and mmc disk 
driver. When I download igb tar.gz and extract, I run make install 
command but it says:


common.mk:84 : *** Kernel header files not in any 
of the expected locations.
common.mk:85 : *** Install the appropriate kernel 
development package, e.g.
common.mk:86 : *** kernel-devel, for building 
kernel modules and try again.  Stop.


Should I do everything from zero?



Did you install the headers in as in '6.7. Linux-5.5.1 API Headers'?

We normally save our configuration file in /boot.  For a new kernel:

tar -xf linux-5.x.y.tar.xz
cd linux-5.x.y
cp /boot .config-5.a.b .config
make oldconfig

etc

  -- Bruce
--
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] Different version of automake needed.

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 2/3/20 1:14 PM, Pierre Labastie wrote:

Le 03/02/2020 à 18:11, Bruce Dubbs a écrit :

On 2/3/20 9:58 AM, Pitmaster wrote:

Hi there all,

I have found this problem. I am trying to make LFS 9.0 on my Intel NUC (i5
16 gig mem) Ubuntu 18.04 LTS installed.

At compiling Bison-3.4.1 make gave back the error that it needed automake
1.16. That is a problem for all people using Ubuntu (xubuntu, lubuntu,
edubuntu, etc) version 18.04 LTS (Last LTS version).
For me it didn't mean a big problem, I have upgraded my automake to version
1.16. Solved.


I don't think we've seen this reported before.  We generally test build from
previous versions of LFS.  We may need to add automake to the version check at
the beginning of the book.  You may want to try using Bison-3.5.1.


Now, today, I wanted to compile Coreutils-8.31. What do you think happend?
Yes it needs automake 1.15 (actually aclocal) but my version is now "aclocal
(GNU automake) 1.16.1".


That may be an issue with how you updated automake.  Coreutils-8.31 is known
to build fine with automake 1.16.1.  The only thing I can think of is to purge
automake on the host and then reinstall it.



There is something wrong here: no released version of a package should need
automake unless configure.ac or Makefile.am are modified. I'm almost sure
automake is never run in chapter 5. So automake is not needed at all on the 
host.
To "Pitmaster": have you done something special not in the book?


Good point Pierre.  I just checked my logs and the only call to automake 
is in coreutils in Chapter 6 after automake is built.


  -- Bruce

--
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] Different version of automake needed.

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 2/3/20 9:58 AM, Pitmaster wrote:

Hi there all,

I have found this problem. I am trying to make LFS 9.0 on my Intel NUC 
(i5 16 gig mem) Ubuntu 18.04 LTS installed.


At compiling Bison-3.4.1 make gave back the error that it needed 
automake 1.16. That is a problem for all people using Ubuntu (xubuntu, 
lubuntu, edubuntu, etc) version 18.04 LTS (Last LTS version).
For me it didn't mean a big problem, I have upgraded my automake to 
version 1.16. Solved.


I don't think we've seen this reported before.  We generally test build 
from previous versions of LFS.  We may need to add automake to the 
version check at the beginning of the book.  You may want to try using 
Bison-3.5.1.


Now, today, I wanted to compile Coreutils-8.31. What do you think 
happend? Yes it needs automake 1.15 (actually aclocal) but my version is 
now "aclocal (GNU automake) 1.16.1".


That may be an issue with how you updated automake.  Coreutils-8.31 is 
known to build fine with automake 1.16.1.  The only thing I can think of 
is to purge automake on the host and then reinstall it.


  -- Bruce
--
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] Install texinfo on Centos7 / CentOS Linux 7 (Core)

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 1/26/20 3:52 PM, knothea...@gmail.com wrote:

I am trying to install texinfo on this server; how do i get it installed?

[root@lfs-wk ~]# hostnamectl
    Static hostname: lfs-wk.shadowman.lab
          Icon name: computer-vm
            Chassis: vm
         Machine ID: 18a3793d59c149eda5e031aee4c1f12a
            Boot ID: 3b995a650b404c82ba41813fcbab78a7
     Virtualization: kvm
   Operating System: CentOS Linux 7 (Core)
        CPE OS Name: cpe:/o:centos:centos:7
             Kernel: Linux 3.10.0-1062.9.1.el7.x86_64
       Architecture: x86-64

[root@lfs-wk ~]# cat /etc/redhat-release
CentOS Linux release 7.7.1908 (Core)

[root@lfs-wk ~]# ./version-check.sh
bash, version 4.2.46(2)-release
/bin/sh -> /usr/bin/bash
Binutils: version 2.27-41.base.el7_7.1
bison (GNU Bison) 3.0.4
yacc is /usr/bin/yacc - 1.9 20130304
bzip2,  Version 1.0.6, 6-Sept-2010.
Coreutils:  8.22
diff (GNU diffutils) 3.3
find (GNU findutils) 4.5.11
GNU Awk 4.0.2
/usr/bin/awk -> /usr/bin/gawk
gcc (GCC) 4.8.5 20150623 (Red Hat 4.8.5-39)
g++ (GCC) 4.8.5 20150623 (Red Hat 4.8.5-39)
(GNU libc) 2.17
grep (GNU grep) 2.20
gzip 1.5
Linux version 3.10.0-1062.9.1.el7.x86_64 
(mockbu...@kbuilder.bsys.centos.org 
) (gcc version 4.8.5 20150623 
(Red Hat 4.8.5-39) (GCC) ) #1 SMP Fri Dec 6 15:49:49 UTC 2019

m4 (GNU M4) 1.4.16
GNU Make 3.82
GNU patch 2.7.1
Perl version='5.16.3';
Python 3.6.8
sed (GNU sed) 4.2.2
tar (GNU tar) 1.26
./version-check.sh: line 48: makeinfo: command not found


For redhat, I think you need "dnf install texinfo"

  -- Bruce




xz (XZ Utils) 5.2.2
g++ compilation OK

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

Re: [lfs-support] Glibc2.30 1st pass failed: 'time' alias in time.c

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 1/26/20 12:41 PM, Flareon wrote:

On January 26, 2020, at 04:10, Xi Ruoyao  wrote:

 >On 2020-01-26 15:13 +0530, Sourabh Sagar wrote:
 >> One thread recommend use of '-Wno-attribute-alias' ... when using it 
glibc2.30

 >> compiled successfully(in a separate sub-directory)...
 >Don't reference those articles telling how to build Glibc on a 
complete system.

 >LFS has a different way.
 >> but testing newly built toolchain against dummy.c(as in glibc2.30 
1st pass

 >> article) via `$LFS_TGT-gcc dummy.c`
 >>
 >> a new error appears stating expansion of $LFS_TGT-gcc  not found in
 >> $LFS/tools/bin.
 >We shouldn't continue blindly if any error is encountered.  Without 
$LFS_TGT-gcc
 >glibc would be built with host GCC.  That does not make any sense (in 
LFS).

 >--
 >Xi Ruoyao 
 >School of Aerospace Science and Technology, Xidian University
 >--
 >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

So, your summary is thus:

Fix where /bin/sh points
Don't deviate at all from the book
Don't blindly follow online posts


That's pretty much right.  I will add to the second item "for the first 
time through".  Sometimes new users can have the attitude "I'm 
experienced and I know enough to change what is in the book."  But that 
can get users into trouble,



Also, I'm a girl, and we're not a company. We just like doing this stuff.


I'm not sure about the "I'm a girl" comment, but the rest is certainly 
true.  LFS is made up of all volunteers and no one is paid for their 
work on LFS.  Actually it costs us to buy our own systems and pay for 
web hosting. Think of it as as our contribution to the open source 
community.


LFS is dedicated to learning and teaching users how a distro really 
works.  The fact that some have used it as a basis for creating custom 
systems that are used in operational environments is a nice perk.


  -- Bruce
--
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] Glibc2.30 1st pass failed: 'time' alias in time.c

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 1/25/20 11:23 PM, Sourabh Sagar wrote:



# ./version_check.sh
GNU bash, version 5.0.3(1)-release
--Error: /bin/sh doesn't point to bash-


First fix this.  Then start over.

  -- Bruce



Binutils: GNU ld (GNU Binutils for Debian) 2.31.1
bison (GNU Bison) 3.3.2
/usr/bin/yacc ---> /usr/bin/bison.yacc
bzip2,  Version 1.0.6, 6-Sept-2010.
Coreutils: chown (GNU coreutils) 8.30
diff (GNU diffutils) 3.7
find (GNU findutils) 4.6.0.225-235f
GNU Awk 4.2.1, API: 2.0 (GNU MPFR 4.0.2, GNU MP 6.1.2)
/usr/bin/awk ---> /usr/bin/gawk
gcc (Debian 8.3.0-6) 8.3.0
g++ (Debian 8.3.0-6) 8.3.0
ldd (Debian GLIBC 2.28-10) 2.28
grep (GNU grep) 3.3
gzip 1.9
cat (GNU coreutils) 8.30
m4 (GNU M4) 1.4.18
GNU Make 4.2.1
GNU patch 2.7.6
Python 3.7.3
Perl version='5.28.1';
sed (GNU sed) 4.7
tar (GNU tar) 1.30
texi2any (GNU texinfo) 6.5
xz (XZ Utils) 5.2.4

Permission of source & tools directory are shown below
$ ll $LFS/
total 36
drwx--  2 root root 16384 Jan 20 12:46 lost+found
drwxrwxrwt  6 lfs  root  4096 Jan 21 18:06 sources
drwxr-xr-x 11 lfs  root  4096 Jan 23 00:31 tools
-rwxr-xr-x  1 root root  1319 Jan 20 15:42 version_check.sh
-rw-r--r--  1 root root  5367 Jan 20 16:06 wget-list

An early response from concerned stakeholders would be appreciated.
Thank you



--
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] Building editor-manual

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 1/22/20 8:29 PM, Douglas R. Reno wrote:





This link does not exist any more

http://docbook.sourceforge.net/release/xsl/1.69.1/xhtml/profile-docbook.xsl 



I can confirm this, it seems that the oldest version that they have 
available on Sourceforge is 1.70.1 (2006-05-26 is the datestamp).


But what should be used is docbook-xsl-nons-1.79.2.

  -- Bruce

--
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] Building editor-manual

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 1/22/20 12:15 PM, Douglas R. Reno wrote:


On 1/22/20 11:40 AM, Scott Andrews wrote:
I am trying to build the lfs editor manual after downloading the 
source with svn


executing make nochunks returns the following error

 $ make nochunks
xsltproc --xinclude --nonet -stringparam profile.condition html \
--output ~/lfs-editors-guide/LFS-EDITORS-GUIDE.html \
  stylesheets/lfs-nochunks.xsl index.xml
I/O error : Attempt to load network entity 
http://docbook.sourceforge.net/release/xsl/1.69.1/xhtml/profile-docbook.xsl 

warning: failed to load external entity 
"http://docbook.sourceforge.net/release/xsl/1.69.1/xhtml/profile-docbook.xsl"; 

compilation error: file stylesheets/lfs-nochunks.xsl line 8 element 
import
xsl:import : unable to load 
http://docbook.sourceforge.net/release/xsl/1.69.1/xhtml/profile-docbook.xsl 


make: *** [Makefile:43: nochunks] Error 5

I have built the LFS SVN successfully so I am of the opinion that is a 
problem related to the building process used in the Makefile


Any way to get this to work?


Hi Scott,

I'm not sure on this as I haven't tried to build the editor manual, but 
my guess is that it's using an older version of the stylesheets. Bruce 
is probably the person to answer this one, but I can answer the question 
below:



Also How would you build the LFS-9.0 from the BOOK source?


If you're looking to render the book, do this (from within the 
trunk/BOOK folder of an SVN checkout):


make REV=sysv BASEDIR=~/wherever_you_want_your_files_output_to

To do a systemd build, replace "sysv" with "systemd" in the above command.

Here's an example from mine:

make REV=systemd BASEDIR=~/public_html/lfs-trunk-sysd


Or for the book, just use the defaults with 'make'.  sysv is the 
default.  Look at the Makefile for the other defaults.


As to why the LFS-EDITORS-GUIDE is not building, it is probably because 
the dependencies are not installed or configured properly.  Here is what 
you need:


libxml2
libxslt
DocBook XSL Stylesheets (docbook-xsl-nons-1.79.2 in BLFS)
DocBook XML DTD-4.5 (docbook-4.5 in BLFS)
tidy

Pay close attention to the configuration of the docbook packages and 
their dependencies.


Also I note that there are some issues with the editor's guide because 
we haven't updated it lately.  Checking...


There has only been one minor change in the last 14 years, but the 
contents are still valid AFAICS.


I had to comment out hide-endtags and drop-font-tags in tidy.conf due to 
using a newer version of tidy and I also had to:


sudo mkdir -p /usr/share/xml/docbook/xsl-stylesheets-current/images/
sudo touch /usr/share/xml/docbook/xsl-stylesheets-current/images/dummy.png

  -- Bruce


--
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 for ARM

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 1/20/20 2:49 PM, Scott Andrews wrote:
My foray into building LFS on the raspberry pi platform has went 
extremely well.  I am thinking about taking the LFS book that is 
currently available and modifying it for the ARM platform.  The required 
changes are not many.  This may turn out to be a long range project, as 
I am going to look into doing this after I get two rpi servers and a 
couple of desktop systems built.


If I am successful in doing so could it be placed on the 
linuxfromscratch.org website as a new project?


Are there any copyright issues with doing this?


There are no copyright issues, but there is a maintenance issue.  The 
book(s) are created from xml source code and stable editions are 
published twice a year with new packages from upstream developers.  The 
development versions of the book (especially BLFS) are updated almost 
daily and the new stable versions are created from that.  The stable 
versions then require comprehensive building and testing.


The above is a lot of work and requires a substantial long term 
commitment of time and effort.


An alternative is to create a hint that takes a snapshot from a current 
version of the book(s) and documents what changes are needed that 
differentiate the rpi from an x86_64 build.


  -- Bruce


--
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] Raspberry pi

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 1/5/20 1:34 PM, Scott Andrews wrote:
Looking to see if there is any interest for LFS running on Raspberry pi 
hardware here?


I am currently working to get a build of LFS working on some raspberry 
pi 4 hardware. I have LFS version 8.4 running on Rpi 2 and Rpi3 which I 
currently use them for IMAP server and a validating DNS server. Wireless 
from BLFS-8.4 works well on the Rpi3.


I purchased a Raspberry pi 4 with 4GB ram and I am going to leave the 
Intel platform and goto the Raspberry pi platform.  I want to build an 
entire desktop to serve as my desktop machine using a light weight 
destop manager like LXDE.  Raspian Buster works well but I want to build 
my own.


Maybe a offshoot like CLFS or LFS systemd?


https://intestinate.com/pilfs/

--
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] Glibc Localedef Problem

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 1/5/20 10:41 AM, Alan Feuerbacher wrote:

What do you use for backup on Linux? For many years, on my Windows 
computer, I've had two extra backup disks installed, and use Acronis to 
do incremental backups to  one of those disks every day. Every couple of 
weeks I switch the backup to the other disk, so I have some redundancy.


I think rsync is what you want.

  -- Bruce

--
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-9.0 5.24. Gettext-0.20.1 build error

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 1/5/20 8:01 AM, Scott Andrews wrote:


This is what I used in the build:

./configure --disable-shared

make -j1

The result:


[snip]

make[2]: Entering directory 
'/mnt/lfs/source/gettext-0.20.1/gettext-tools/src'

here=`pwd`; \
cd ../../libtextstyle/lib && \
   make install-nobase_includeHEADERS 
install-nobase_nodist_includeHEADERS includedir="$here"
make[3]: Entering directory 
'/mnt/lfs/usr/src/LFS-RPi/BUILD/gettext-0.20.1/libtextstyle/lib'

make[3]: *** No rule to make target 'install-nobase_includeHEADERS'.  Stop.


I'm not sure what is happening here.  This is what I have in the same area:

cd ../../libtextstyle/lib && \
  make install-nobase_includeHEADERS 
install-nobase_nodist_includeHEADERS includedir="$here"
make[6]: Entering directory 
'/mnt/lfs/sources/gettext-0.20.1/libtextstyle/lib'

 /tools/bin/mkdir -p '/mnt/lfs/sources/gettext-0.20.1/gettext-tools/src'
 /tools/bin/install -c -m 644  textstyle.h 
'/mnt/lfs/sources/gettext-0.20.1/gettext-tools/src/.'

 /tools/bin/mkdir -p '/mnt/lfs/sources/gettext-0.20.1/gettext-tools/src'
 /tools/bin/mkdir -p 
'/mnt/lfs/sources/gettext-0.20.1/gettext-tools/src/textstyle'

...

What I do see in your log is

 Entering directory
'/mnt/lfs/usr/src/LFS-RPi/BUILD...

So the system is a Raspberry Pi?

I'm wondering why you have:

Entering /mnt/lfs/source/gettext-0.20.1/gettext-tools/src

followed by

Entering /mnt/lfs/usr/src/LFS-RPi/BUILD/...

  -- Bruce

--
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-9.0 5.24. Gettext-0.20.1 build error

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 1/4/20 7:45 PM, Ken Moffat wrote:

On Sat, Jan 04, 2020 at 05:11:18PM -0500, Scott Andrews wrote:


On 1/4/20 1:45 PM, Flareon Zulu wrote:


On January 4, 2020, at 09:47, Scott Andrews
 wrote:


Anyone have this error?
ar cr libgrep.a glthread/lock.o glthread/threadlib.o kwset.o m-fgrep.o
m-regex.o mbrlen.o regex.o
ranlib libgrep.a
make[3]: Leaving directory
'/mnt/lfs/source/gettext-0.20.1/gettext-tools/libgrep'
Making all in src
here=`pwd`; \
cd ../../libtextstyle/lib && \
   /usr/bin/make install-nobase_includeHEADERS
install-nobase_nodist_includeHEADERS includedir="$here"
make[3]: *** No rule to make target 'install-nobase_includeHEADERS'.

Stop.

make[2]: *** [Makefile:3955: textstyle.h] Error 2
make[1]: *** [Makefile:2173: all-recursive] Error 1
make: *** [Makefile:2041: all] Error 2
Didn't see anything on the list about this
Gettext-0.19.8.1 is ok
--




Especially in light of this: https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?56333

It seems there could be an issue with build order, essentially. I didn't
have an issue, but some people online have had this happen, they're just
not on this list.

Flareon Zulu


Could very well be,  I will follow up on the link you posted and see if I
caqn make sense in it.



The usual workaround for what that sounds like is "make -j1".
Apologies if you are already doing that.  My most recent example of
that was in bison on a Skylake (an i3 so I'd been running make -j4 :
perhaps -j3 or -j2 might have sufficed).  On other machines (haswell
i7, ryzen 3400G) make -j8 was fine.  Modern CPUs can be a pain.

And that is another thing to learn from LFS - ISTR that dropping
back to -j1 in case of problems is mentioned in the FAQ.


In section 4.5. About SBUs, the last sentence in the note:

"If you run into a problem with a build step, revert back to a single 
processor build to properly analyze the error messages."


This may be the cause of the error, but I think it is unlikely.  The 
last release of gettext was in May and we certainly would have run into 
the problem before this if it has a race condition.


  -- Bruce
.

--
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] Failure Building Cyrus and OpenLDAP

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 1/4/20 7:15 PM, Alan Feuerbacher wrote:

On 1/4/2020 12:59 PM, Xi Ruoyao wrote:

On 2020-01-04 10:56 -0700，Alan Feuerbacher wrote:

I'm not sure if this should go to the lfs or blfs support list,
since I'm still in the chroot environment at the end of the LFS
book, but am installing several programs that are useful when
I eventually get systemd running.


I'm building some helpful BLFS programs using Beyond
Linux® From Scratch (systemd Edition) - Version 2020-01-03

At this point I'm trying to build Cyrus SASL-2.1.27 and
OpenLDAP-2.4.48. According to this hint:
http://wiki.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/wiki/cyrus-sasl

This page was wrote 14 years ago!

http://wiki.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/wiki/cyrus-sasl?action=history

I believe it's outdated and we should remove this URL from the book.
(Well, back in 2006 I was using Windoge XP and didn't know Linux :)

I agree!


I removed that page.

  -- Bruce


Though I don't use OpenLDAP, I think the correct method is to build 
and install
Cyrus SASL w/o OpenLDAP, then build and install OpenLDAP, then rebuild 
Cyrus

SASL.  (Just like how we deals Freetype and Harfbuzz.)


That's what I just did, and it seems to work fine.

Alan



--
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-9.0 5.24. Gettext-0.20.1 build error

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 1/4/20 4:11 PM, Scott Andrews wrote:


On 1/4/20 1:45 PM, Flareon Zulu wrote:


On January 4, 2020, at 09:47, Scott Andrews 
 wrote:


>Anyone have this error?
>ar cr libgrep.a glthread/lock.o glthread/threadlib.o kwset.o m-fgrep.o
>m-regex.o mbrlen.o regex.o
>ranlib libgrep.a
>make[3]: Leaving directory
>'/mnt/lfs/source/gettext-0.20.1/gettext-tools/libgrep'
>Making all in src
>here=`pwd`; \
>cd ../../libtextstyle/lib && \
>  /usr/bin/make install-nobase_includeHEADERS
>install-nobase_nodist_includeHEADERS includedir="$here"
>make[3]: *** No rule to make target 'install-nobase_includeHEADERS'.  
Stop.

>make[2]: *** [Makefile:3955: textstyle.h] Error 2
>make[1]: *** [Makefile:2173: all-recursive] Error 1
>make: *** [Makefile:2041: all] Error 2
>Didn't see anything on the list about this
>Gettext-0.19.8.1 is ok
>--
>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

Especially in light of this: https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?56333

It seems there could be an issue with build order, essentially. I 
didn't have an issue, but some people online have had this happen, 
they're just not on this list.


Flareon Zulu

Could very well be,  I will follow up on the link you posted and see if 
I caqn make sense in it.


It is doubtful that the problem is build order.  Most of the time when 
we update packages we do a complete rebuild of all LFS packages by 
extracting the instructions from the xml source.  Th eprocess is 
completely automated and errors will show up then.


Since the problem is in Chapter 5, there are really only two 
possibilities: an error when following previous instructions or a 
problem with the host system.


  -- Bruce

--
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] login as root -- su root OR su - root ?

[Bruce Dubbs]

OK everybody.  Drop this thread.  We do not want personal attacks on our 
mailing lists.  Keep it technical and things will be fine.


  -- Bruce
--
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] login as root -- su root OR su - root ?

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 12/31/19 11:30 PM, Alan Feuerbacher wrote:

On 12/31/2019 5:01 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:

On 12/31/19 4:47 PM, Alan Feuerbacher wrote:

Another question on building LFS Version 20191222-systemd:
In Section "5.37. Changing Ownership" there's a Note:

"The commands in the remainder of this book must be performed while
logged in as user root and no longer as user lfs. Also, double check
that $LFS is set in root's environment."

At this point in the build process I'm logged in as user lfs, having
done so with "su - lfs" back in Section "4.3. Adding the LFS User".
I could "exit" and get back to whatever user I was, and then do
"su - root" or "su root" or perhaps something else.

How do you recommend logging in now as user root?

Sorry, I'm not fully confident that I know how a shell versus a
login shell plays in the LFS environment.


Use 'exit' to return to the previous user.  You will need to change to 
the root user if you are not already there in order to do some 
preliminary work.  Then in Section 6.4 you will enter chroot (only 
root can run that) and will be the root user there. Being in chroot 
should be apparent from the '(lfs chroot)' part of the prompt.


Alright, now I've gone through the LFS book looking for where the user 
changes. Here's what I've found:


Up to Section 2.3 you're probably going to be your regular user name, in 
my case "alan". Later you switch to "root" and "lfs".


Section 2.3.1 mentions procedures done as the root user after Section 
2.4 . All of the commands after that require you to be root, not an 
unprivileged user. So presumably you would become root with "su root" 
not "su - root". Right?


Section "2.3.2. Chapter 5" says that "all instructions in chapter 5 must 
be done by user lfs. A su - lfs needs to be done before any task in 
Chapter 5."


When we get to my Section 5.37 of interest in this email, the Note says:

"The commands in the remainder of this book must be performed while
logged in as user root and no longer as user lfs. Also, double check
that $LFS is set in root's environment."

So using 'exit' will return you from user lfs to user root. This is the 
answer I was looking for.


And if you somehow foul up the various "su" invocations -- which I've 
done several times in past builds -- you have to do "su root" and make 
sure that all the environmental variables are set properly. Right?


Actually it doesn't matter how you switch to root.  The commands needed 
are basic.  It DOES matter that the environment variable LFS is set for 
the root user.


Switching to user lfs DOES matter when switching to user lfs.

  -- Bruce




--
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] login as root -- su root OR su - root ?

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 12/31/19 4:47 PM, Alan Feuerbacher wrote:

Another question on building LFS Version 20191222-systemd:
In Section "5.37. Changing Ownership" there's a Note:

"The commands in the remainder of this book must be performed while
logged in as user root and no longer as user lfs. Also, double check
that $LFS is set in root's environment."

At this point in the build process I'm logged in as user lfs, having
done so with "su - lfs" back in Section "4.3. Adding the LFS User".
I could "exit" and get back to whatever user I was, and then do
"su - root" or "su root" or perhaps something else.

How do you recommend logging in now as user root?

Sorry, I'm not fully confident that I know how a shell versus a
login shell plays in the LFS environment.


Use 'exit' to return to the previous user.  You will need to change to 
the root user if you are not already there in order to do some 
preliminary work.  Then in Section 6.4 you will enter chroot (only root 
can run that) and will be the root user there.  Being in chroot should 
be apparent from the '(lfs chroot)' part of the prompt.


To exit chroot, again use 'exit', but you will not need to do that until 
you finish the book.


Note the the difference between a login shell and a non-login shell is 
the initialization scripts that are run.  See the bash man page for 
details in the INVOCATION section.


  -- Bruce

--
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] Checksum Error in Version 20191222-systemd

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 12/31/19 3:37 PM, Cindy Sue Causey wrote:

On 12/31/19, Cindy Sue Causey  wrote:

On 12/30/19, Bruce Dubbs  wrote:

On 12/30/19 4:20 PM, Alan Feuerbacher wrote:

In section "3.1 Introduction" checking checksums shows an error for line
61: python-3.8.1-docs...


OK, it's been fixed.  Thanks.



Hi, All! *waving*


< snipped for brevity >


Which NEXT just caused me to think that my files came from two
different locations. Maybe if there's (presumably) manual labor in
updating all of that, some of us maybe got caught in a nanosecond
update differential of some kind:

* From LFS' wget-list

https://www.python.org/ftp/python/doc/3.8.1/python-3.8.1-docs-html.tar.bz2

* From backing up Python's 404'ed URL
https://docs.python.org/3/archives/python-3.8.1-docs-html.tar.bz2

Having the thought to provide those may have just paid off. There's
now a *December 31st* timestamp on that second docs.python.org lead.
If I wasn't on dialup, I'd trooper up and download that JUST to run
md5sum again to see what happens. LOL!



Couldn't let it drop so I downloaded one MORE time. Seconds after it
finished, UTC occurred to me with respect to Python's servers. That
would account for Python's server(s) with December 31st versus the
December 30th date stamp on my local personal computer. As expected,
the current md5sum for THAT one is still the value that ends with
"bb".

BUT that doesn't explain the wget-list URL that shows December 18th on
Python's server(s) then now shows as December 29th on mine locally.
No, it's not a UTC download stamp for that one somehow. I didn't start
downloading until early afternoon yesterday. That would not have been
touched by December 29th in any way. :D


We've had a few issues with python-3.8.1-doc in the last couple of days. 
 It should be OK now.


Just for your information (and the list's), what I do for every LFS 
update is create the md5sums file from the source and then run 'md5sum 
-c md5sums'.  That way I make sure all the md5sums match what is in the 
book. At times we've seen upstream make stealth updates that change the 
file without changing the file name.  Sometimes the only thing that 
changes is the time stamps, but that's enough to change the md5sum. 
Also we've seen mirrors that have different files with the same 
filename.  In any case we generally get it right after a report.


For stable LFS books, all the files can be retrieved from
http://ftp-osl.osuosl.org/pub/lfs/lfs-packages/

  -- Bruce

--
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] Checksum Error in Version 20191222-systemd

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 12/30/19 4:20 PM, Alan Feuerbacher wrote:
In section "3.1 Introduction" checking checksums shows an error for line 
61: python-3.8.1-docs...


OK, it's been fixed.  Thanks.

  -- Bruce

--
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] Chroot Path Problem for Python

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 12/29/19 10:41 PM, Alan Feuerbacher wrote:


On 12/29/2019 4:28 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:

On 12/29/19 4:57 PM, Ken Moffat wrote:

On Sun, Dec 29, 2019 at 09:02:34PM +, Ken Moffat wrote:

On Sun, Dec 29, 2019 at 01:40:17PM -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:

On 12/29/19 12:03 PM, Alan Feuerbacher wrote:

On 12/29/2019 9:35 AM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:

On 12/29/19 9:45 AM, Alan Feuerbacher wrote:

What do you get for "ldd /tools/bin/python3" ?

   -- Bruce


(lfs chroot) root:/tools/bin# ldd /tools/bin/python3
      linux-vdso.so.1 (0x7ffcc9e82000)
      libcrypt.so.2 => not found
      libpthread.so.0 => /tools/lib/libpthread.so.0
(0x7f8eaa69b000)
      libdl.so.2 => /tools/lib/libdl.so.2 (0x7f8eaa696000)
      libutil.so.1 => /tools/lib/libutil.so.1 
(0x7f8eaa691000)

      libm.so.6 => /tools/lib/libm.so.6 (0x7f8eaa54e000)
      libc.so.6 => /tools/lib/libc.so.6 (0x7f8eaa39)
      /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 => /tools/lib64/ld-linux-x86-
64.so.2 (0x7f8eaa6be000)



'libcrypt.so.2 => not found' is enough to prevent the application from
running.  libcrypt.so.1 should have been installed by glibc.  I do 
not know

why python is looking for libcrypt.so.2.  Is that from your host?



Is Alan building on fedora-30 or later ?

A gurgle for libcrypt.so.2 found
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1666033

Apparently fedora have moved to libxcrypt.  There is a
libxcrypt-compat package which installs libcrypt.so.1.
Whether installing that on the host will help for LFS
I have no idea, but I suspect it won't be that simple.

Looking at https://github.com/pypa/manylinux/issues/305
I suspect that this might be problematic.  But probably
only for python.

And the reasoning for the change is at
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/FullyRemoveDeprecatedAndUnsafeFunctionsFromLibcrypt 



ĸen


Perhaps, before building python in /tools,
ln -sv libcrypt.so.1 /tools/libcrypt.so.2
(just a suggestion, I've no way of testing it)


I don't see that.  Glibc-2.30 in section 5.7 should create 
libcrypt.so.1 in /tools/lib.



I'm building with Fedora 31.


Alan, that doesn't make any difference.  We are building with our own 
source.  Nothing in /tools should be from the host distro.


  -- Bruce

--
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] Chroot Path Problem for Python

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 12/29/19 4:57 PM, Ken Moffat wrote:

On Sun, Dec 29, 2019 at 09:02:34PM +, Ken Moffat wrote:

On Sun, Dec 29, 2019 at 01:40:17PM -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:

On 12/29/19 12:03 PM, Alan Feuerbacher wrote:

On 12/29/2019 9:35 AM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:

On 12/29/19 9:45 AM, Alan Feuerbacher wrote:

What do you get for "ldd /tools/bin/python3" ?

   -- Bruce


(lfs chroot) root:/tools/bin# ldd /tools/bin/python3
      linux-vdso.so.1 (0x7ffcc9e82000)
      libcrypt.so.2 => not found
      libpthread.so.0 => /tools/lib/libpthread.so.0
(0x7f8eaa69b000)
      libdl.so.2 => /tools/lib/libdl.so.2 (0x7f8eaa696000)
      libutil.so.1 => /tools/lib/libutil.so.1 (0x7f8eaa691000)
      libm.so.6 => /tools/lib/libm.so.6 (0x7f8eaa54e000)
      libc.so.6 => /tools/lib/libc.so.6 (0x7f8eaa39)
      /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 => /tools/lib64/ld-linux-x86-
64.so.2 (0x7f8eaa6be000)



'libcrypt.so.2 => not found' is enough to prevent the application from
running.  libcrypt.so.1 should have been installed by glibc.  I do not know
why python is looking for libcrypt.so.2.  Is that from your host?



Is Alan building on fedora-30 or later ?

A gurgle for libcrypt.so.2 found
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1666033

Apparently fedora have moved to libxcrypt.  There is a
libxcrypt-compat package which installs libcrypt.so.1.
Whether installing that on the host will help for LFS
I have no idea, but I suspect it won't be that simple.

Looking at https://github.com/pypa/manylinux/issues/305
I suspect that this might be problematic.  But probably
only for python.

And the reasoning for the change is at
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/FullyRemoveDeprecatedAndUnsafeFunctionsFromLibcrypt

ĸen


Perhaps, before building python in /tools,
ln -sv libcrypt.so.1 /tools/libcrypt.so.2
(just a suggestion, I've no way of testing it)


I don't see that.  Glibc-2.30 in section 5.7 should create libcrypt.so.1 
in /tools/lib.


  -- Bruce

--
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] Chroot Path Problem for Python

[Bruce Dubbs]

On 12/29/19 12:03 PM, Alan Feuerbacher wrote:

On 12/29/2019 9:35 AM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:

On 12/29/19 9:45 AM, Alan Feuerbacher wrote:

I'm building LFS Version 20191222-systemd, and have run into a problem
I've not seen before. I've entered the Chroot Environment section
and have gotten up to building glibc.

Configure for glibc failed for the Python3 check. For some reason,
the chroot environment does not find python3 to check its version,
although it finds other programs with no trouble.

For example, the system finds sed:
###
(lfs chroot) root:/tools/bin# ./sed --version
./sed (GNU sed) 4.7
. . .
###

But the system does not find python3.8 or the link python3:
###
(lfs chroot) root:/tools/bin# ./python3.8 --version
bash: ./python3.8: No such file or directory
###

Yet everything looks fine in a directory listing:
###
(lfs chroot) root:/tools/bin# ls -l py*
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root    8 Dec 29 06:02 pydoc3 -> pydoc3.8
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root   80 Dec 29 06:02 pydoc3.8
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root    9 Dec 29 06:02 python3 -> python3.8
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root   16 Dec 29 06:02 python3-config ->
python3.8-config
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 20059976 Dec 29 06:02 python3.8
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 3083 Dec 29 06:02 python3.8-config
###

Am I missing something?


What do you get for "ldd /tools/bin/python3" ?

  -- Bruce


(lfs chroot) root:/tools/bin# ldd /tools/bin/python3
     linux-vdso.so.1 (0x7ffcc9e82000)
     libcrypt.so.2 => not found
     libpthread.so.0 => /tools/lib/libpthread.so.0
(0x7f8eaa69b000)
     libdl.so.2 => /tools/lib/libdl.so.2 (0x7f8eaa696000)
     libutil.so.1 => /tools/lib/libutil.so.1 (0x7f8eaa691000)
     libm.so.6 => /tools/lib/libm.so.6 (0x7f8eaa54e000)
     libc.so.6 => /tools/lib/libc.so.6 (0x7f8eaa39)
     /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 => /tools/lib64/ld-linux-x86-
64.so.2 (0x7f8eaa6be000)



'libcrypt.so.2 => not found' is enough to prevent the application from 
running.  libcrypt.so.1 should have been installed by glibc.  I do not 
know why python is looking for libcrypt.so.2.  Is that from your host?


  -- Bruce

--
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