Re: BLFS 6.1 Final?

Randy McMurchy wrote: Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 08/14/05 11:54 CST: Is there anything else that needs to be done for a final 6.1? Just discovered that the recent bugfix to reorder the CUPS and Samba bootscripts didn't fix anything. The CUPS instructions install default

Re: BLFS 6.1 Final?

DJ Lucas wrote these words on 08/15/05 00:59 CST: Damn I had forgotten about that. How long has 6.1 been up? Proper fix is to modify the Makefile to rm -f S99cups in the affected runlevels, and recreate the tarball. I don't think Bruce has released the final version. Proper fix or not, the

Re: BLFS 6.1 Final?

DJ Lucas wrote: Randy McMurchy wrote: Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 08/14/05 11:54 CST: Is there anything else that needs to be done for a final 6.1? Just discovered that the recent bugfix to reorder the CUPS and Samba bootscripts didn't fix anything. The CUPS instructions install

Re: BLFS 6.1 Final?

DJ Lucas wrote: Randy McMurchy wrote: Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 08/14/05 11:54 CST: Is there anything else that needs to be done for a final 6.1? Just discovered that the recent bugfix to reorder the CUPS and Samba bootscripts didn't fix anything. The CUPS instructions install

Testing Changes

Hi all, Just a reminder to the devs that there is really nothing more important in our work than *testing* the changes we put in the book. Sure, minor textual changes don't really need changes, but anything that has to do with installing files, or some instruction crucial to the installation of a

Re: BLFS 6.1 Final?

DJ Lucas wrote these words on 08/15/05 01:13 CST: Randy..you got it, this should do it. [snip stuff] I'm tired, and not in a position right now to do proper testing. If you think it is good, then do it. -- Randy rmlscsi: [GNU ld version 2.15.94.0.2 20041220] [gcc (GCC) 3.4.3] [GNU C

Re: BLFS 6.1 Final?

Randy McMurchy wrote: DJ Lucas wrote these words on 08/15/05 01:13 CST: Randy..you got it, this should do it. [snip stuff] I'm tired, and not in a position right now to do proper testing. If you think it is good, then do it. OMG. I've installed (make install) cups 10 times in the

Re: BLFS 6.1 Final?

DJ Lucas wrote these words on 08/15/05 01:22 CST: OMG. I've installed (make install) cups 10 times in the past 5 minutes! :-D It didn't even occur that those scripts were left there from the install. Typically this is not needed with bootscripts...really I did test the interaction of the

Re: BLFS 6.1 Final?

Randy McMurchy wrote: DJ Lucas wrote these words on 08/15/05 01:13 CST: Randy..you got it, this should do it. I forgot to mention the fact that this doesn't fix the text in the book that says, the installed CUPS bootscripts are okay ... or whatever it says. I think we need to slow

Re: BLFS 6.1 Final?

DJ Lucas wrote: Randy McMurchy wrote: DJ Lucas wrote these words on 08/15/05 01:13 CST: Randy..you got it, this should do it. I forgot to mention the fact that this doesn't fix the text in the book that says, the installed CUPS bootscripts are okay ... or whatever it says. I think we need

Re: BLFS 6.1 Final?

DJ Lucas wrote these words on 08/15/05 02:00 CST: paraDuring the install, applicationCUPS/application created the startup files in filename class=directory/etc/rc.d/filename. These scripts will work in most cases, but will fail if you provide printers to samba clients.

Re: BLFS 6.1 Final?

DJ Lucas wrote these words on 08/15/05 02:00 CST: paraDuring the install, applicationCUPS/application created the startup files in filename class=directory/etc/rc.d/filename. These scripts will work in most cases, but will fail if you provide printers to samba clients.

Re: [RFC] Multiple ghostscript packages

On Fre, 2005-08-12 at 13:16 +0600, Alexander E. Patrakov wrote: Alexander E. Patrakov wrote: There was a PDF file that ESP ghostscript opened perfectly and GNU ghostscript didn't. It's here: http://www.nims.go.jp/apfim/pdf/CoFinemet_JAP.pdf [...] So the failing test is: gs

Re: LibXML2 trouble

DJ Lucas wrote: This same issue will affect mplayer as well as mentioned on blfs-support in the yet unanswered thread titled undefined reference to `rk_globfree'/`rk_glob'. I came across this compiling on BLFS 6.1-pre with gcc-3.4.3, problem was solved by just going back to libxml-2.6.19.

Re: LibXML2 trouble

Greg Schafer wrote: But that sed will misbehave when run twice in succession (as users often inexplicably do). Mind you, my original sed misbehaves in the same way :-) Slightly better would be this: sed -i 's/^XCFLAGS =$/ -fomit-frame-pointer/' gcc/Makefile.in Thanks Greg, I'll fix it up

Re: LibXML2 trouble

Matthew Burgess wrote these words on 08/15/05 12:59 CST: And sorry to the blfs-dev crowd for the not-quite-on-topicness :) Waddaya mean? The title says libxml2 trouble. That's enough to consider it on-topic, isn't it? :-) -- Randy rmlscsi: [GNU ld version 2.15.94.0.2 20041220] [gcc (GCC)

Grammar help!

Hi all, I'm struggling with a sentence. Wondering if it sounds okay to y'all or if someone can provide better wording. Here is some background. The CUPS test suite is run with make check. After running that command, you are prompted with a couple of questions after a message is displayed

Re: Grammar help!

Randy McMurchy wrote: To test the results, issue: make check. Note that the “torture load testing” test uses more resources than is displayed in the message prompting you to choose which test to run. s/is/those/ possibly, or s/is/are/. is doesn't seem to match with the plural/collective

Re: Grammar help!

Matthew Burgess wrote these words on 08/15/05 13:33 CST: s/is/those/ possibly, or s/is/are/. is doesn't seem to match with the plural/collective resources it refers to. Thanks, Matt. Committed using 'those' instead of 'is'. -- Randy rmlscsi: [GNU ld version 2.15.94.0.2 20041220] [gcc

Re: Grammar help!

Randy McMurchy wrote: Hi all, I'm struggling with a sentence. Wondering if it sounds okay to y'all or if someone can provide better wording. To test the results, issue: make check. Note that the “torture load testing” test uses more resources than is displayed in the message prompting

Grammar help!

Randy McMurchy wrote: Here is some text I am going to commit... please don't hesitate... To test the results, issue: make check. Note that the “torture load testing” test uses more resources than is displayed in the message prompting you to choose which test to run. Could you say: Issue

Re: BLFS 6.1 Final?

Randy McMurchy wrote: DJ Lucas wrote these words on 08/15/05 02:00 CST: paraDuring the install, applicationCUPS/application created the startup files in filename class=directory/etc/rc.d/filename. These scripts will work in most cases, but will fail if you provide

Re: BLFS 6.1 Final?

DJ Lucas wrote these words on 08/15/05 18:59 CST: Now onto actually fixing it. Does the suggested change, with your corrections, read well and provide the reader with correct and needed information? I think it conveys the intended message perfectly! -- Randy rmlscsi: [GNU ld version

Editors' Guide Updates

I've just committed several changes to the Editors' guide. Please take a look and see if thee is more needed. I specifically addressed the issues in bugs 1480 and 1486. http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/edguide/index.html -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev

Other Programming Tools nitpick

In subsection gocache, it says ccache is clone of ccache when it clearly means to say gocache is a clone of ccache I hope it's not too late before 6.1 is released. -- Miguel Bazdresch http://thewizardstower.org/ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: