On May 24, 2012, at 3:38 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
The fstab now looks like:
/dev/sdc1 /ext4 noatime,discard,data=writeback 1 1
/dev/sda3 swap swap pri=10 0
/dev/sda1 /bootext3 defaults 1 2
/dev/sda9
On May 24, 2012, at 6:19 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Overall, I think the results would be more robust if you could run
the same test with ext3 with the same mount options, and see what
those results are.
I created a new ext4 partition and mounted it noatime. My rsync build
time was 20.3
On May 23, 2012, at 4:00 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
I decided to explore using an ssd drive. I purchased a 40G Intel SSD
and so far it works well with SVN-20120514.
I created a GPT partition table with a 10G partition using parted and
formatted as ext4.
The performance seems to be good.
On Mar 21, 2012, at 1:33 AM, Nathan Coulson wrote:
ntpd says it's pidfile is in /var/run, when it should be in /run.
Are you saying that ntpd needs to be built (or run) with different parameters?
For me, /var/run is a symlink (/var/run - /run), although I'm not sure why.
FHS lists /var/run
On Mar 21, 2012, at 7:41 AM, Nathan Coulson wrote:
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 4:26 AM, Armin K. kre...@email.com wrote:
On 03/21/2012 09:33 AM, Nathan Coulson wrote:
ntpd says it's pidfile is in /var/run, when it should be in /run.
/var/run is symlink to /run, so does it really matter?
I answered Nathan's question separately...
On Mar 19, 2012, at 2:40 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
The problem is trying to get the different options working together
properly. Right now the CHECK_LINK is done in ifup. Perhaps it should
be moved to the various service scripts and removed from
at:
https://github.com/qrux/xlapp/tree/master/xlapp-bootscripts
Hope this helps (and I'm crossing my fingers that we don't revert any of the
new functionality...).
Q
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
On Mar 15, 2012, at 8:48 AM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Ragnar Thomsen wrote:
I suggest we resolve the following tickets as wontfix:
#2517 (4 yr old): Add a virtualizers/emulators chapter. Anyone got the
time/will to work on this?
I agree.
I think there's already a start of a Virtualization,
On Mar 15, 2012, at 9:39 AM, Andrew Benton wrote:
On Thu, 15 Mar 2012 14:09:47 +
Ragnar Thomsen ragnarthom...@hotmail.com wrote:
I suggest we resolve the following tickets as wontfix:
#2347 and #2348 (5 yr old): Libmatroska and its dependency libebml.
VLC/MPlayer already support
On Mar 11, 2012, at 6:54 AM, Armin K. wrote:
On 03/11/2012 02:47 PM, Andrew Benton wrote:
On Sun, 11 Mar 2012 13:18:16 +
Armin K.kre...@email.com wrote:
Also, I noticed there is pam_securetty module, and
according to that module documentation, it looks for /etc/securetty file
to
On Mar 11, 2012, at 7:47 AM, Armin K. wrote:
On 03/11/2012 03:33 PM, Qrux wrote:
On Mar 11, 2012, at 6:54 AM, Armin K. wrote:
On 03/11/2012 02:47 PM, Andrew Benton wrote:
On Sun, 11 Mar 2012 13:18:16 +
Armin K.kre...@email.com wrote:
Also, I noticed there is pam_securetty
On Mar 4, 2012, at 9:35 AM, Ken Moffat wrote:
On Sun, Mar 04, 2012 at 05:43:08PM +0100, Ragnar Thomsen wrote:
Are we including this option as default for those packages that support it?
Or should it just be mentioned under Command Explanations?
Currently, the use of this option is not
On Mar 5, 2012, at 6:12 PM, Ken Moffat wrote:
On Mon, Mar 05, 2012 at 03:48:49PM -0800, Qrux wrote:
The feeling I get from the list (obviously that only represents the +w
minority) is that people are rebuilding the world if they need to upgrade.
And, if they're not doing that, they're
On Mar 5, 2012, at 4:26 PM, Ken Moffat wrote:
On Mon, Mar 05, 2012 at 03:48:49PM -0800, Qrux wrote:
What is the case against the default? Presumably the developer had
something in mind when he chose one or the other as the default.
If you *really* don't know why some of us dislike
On Feb 29, 2012, at 8:38 PM, Nathan Coulson wrote:
On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 7:04 PM, Bruce Dubbs bruce.du...@gmail.com wrote:
Andrew Benton wrote:
Thanks to your message I've spent some time playing with gpt today
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GUID_Partition_Table
and I now think there's a
HTTP link points to the homepage, not the actual download.
* * *
Current mirror HTTP URL:
http://mirrors.zerg.biz/stunnel/stunnel-4.52.tar.gz
Reference FTP site:
ftp://ftp.stunnel.org/stunnel/stunnel-4.52.tar.gz
Reference checksum - sha256:
Nice git page.
Let's please change Python to an OPTIONAL dep, and adjust the configure params:
./configure --prefix=/usr --with-gitconfig=/etc/gitconfig
--without-python
I just hate dependencies (especially when they're fat things like Python).
And maybe a mention for optional PCRE
On Feb 20, 2012, at 6:02 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
For most distros, modules are the biggest reason to have an initramfs --
plus the fact that they want a one size fits all methodology. In a way,
this is the antithesis of LFS where we generally build a custom kernel
and rarely need an
On Feb 21, 2012, at 3:16 AM, Nathan Coulson wrote:
On Wed, Feb 1, 2012 at 12:47 PM, Qrux qrux@gmail.com wrote:
On Jan 31, 2012, at 1:26 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
You know I added kvm-qemu to BLFS a couple of days ago, right?
I added a BLFS-style markdown page:
https
On Feb 21, 2012, at 3:43 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Ken Moffat wrote:
At the moment, we have two varieties of tags for past LFS-releases
: built (known to build, but has not been tested), and checked
(builds, and works properly). Am I alone in wondering if there is a
case for something in the
AFAIK, mii-tool is now deprecated.
Net-tools is nice, IMO, because it offers ifconfig, but mii-tool can't report
speeds above 100Base-T.
URL:
http://www.kernel.org/pub/software/network/ethtool/ethtool-3.2.tar.gz
It's fairly CMMI.
I propose keeping net-tools, but also adding ethtool
On Feb 17, 2012, at 1:28 AM, Qrux wrote:
The version of BIND included with BLFS doesn't work. Googled:
named initializing DST: openssl failure
...My gut says the chroot environment is somehow incomplete...
Fixed!
After /srv/named has been setup, do this for BIND-9.8 + chroot-jail
On Feb 16, 2012, at 4:38 AM, Matthew Burgess wrote:
On Thu, 16 Feb 2012 11:16:12 +, Andrew Benton b3n...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, 15 Feb 2012 18:47:37 -0800
Qrux qrux@gmail.com wrote:
* So, I propose turning -x off.
I agree, I run ntpd -g
However, I also think the ntpd
On Feb 16, 2012, at 8:05 AM, Andrew Benton wrote:
On Thu, 16 Feb 2012 15:20:49 +
Ken Moffat zarniwh...@ntlworld.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 07:46:07AM -0700, k...@linuxfromscratch.org wrote:
+
+paraThis package does not have a working testsuite./para
+
I was originally
Is there a reason ntpd is run with -x?
The big slew is nice, but is there a reason it's preferred over the kernel
discipline?
Q
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
On Feb 15, 2012, at 5:00 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Qrux wrote:
Is there a reason ntpd is run with -x?
The big slew is nice, but is there a reason it's preferred over the kernel
discipline?
When you are booting, there is probably nothing else really depending on
timestamps.
Whether
On Feb 13, 2012, at 8:55 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Qrux wrote:
On Feb 13, 2012, at 8:40 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Do you have CONFIG_BLK_DEV_DM set?
Absolutely.
When you boot and do lvdisplay -a, do you see LV Status: available?
I'll have to get back to you on that. When I was doing
At least that was the case for me; if it's being auto-detected for
you, could you send me your kernel config? Obviously that's
preferable...
I validated your comments. I also need to run 'vgchange -a y'
What do you think of adding a line to the start of the start code of
checkfs:
On Feb 14, 2012, at 4:41 PM, DJ Lucas wrote:
On 02/14/2012 06:08 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
What do you think of adding a line to the start of the start code of
checkfs:
if [ -x /usr/sbin/vgchange ]; then
/usr/sbin/vgchange -a y/dev/null
fi
I can only suggest from both a standards
), and to leave the explanations to some other venue like the user-wiki for
tutorial-like docs.
Q
#! /bin/bash
# Begin lvm2
#
# Description : Initiates LVM2 on reboot
#
# Author : Qrux - qrux dot qed @ gmail.com
On Feb 13, 2012, at 7:07 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Qrux wrote:
LVM2 should have a bootscript and a link in /etc/rc.d/rcS.d; if that
hasn't been done yet, feel free to include the one I use (which I've
kept in the LFS/BLFS template).
Thanks for that.
Happy to help.
The meat of it is doing
Nice page.
Just recently been dealing with a HW card that udev doesn't like (doesn't have
SERIAL or SHORT_SERIAL), so I've been thinking about this a lot recently.
* * *
As for pros v cons...
I would think the main advantage to modern HW RAID systems is the ability to
hot-plug. SW RAID has
On Feb 8, 2012, at 4:11 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
I've added mdadm and a new page, About RAID, to the book.
I'd appreciate feedback on ways to improve it.
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/svn/postlfs/raid.html
On a related note...
(As always, it goes without saying that all the
On Feb 8, 2012, at 6:00 PM, Ken Moffat wrote:
On Wed, Feb 08, 2012 at 04:46:23PM -0800, Qrux wrote:
[ confining my remarks to SW RAID, I have no experience of the other
sorts ]
SW RAID is great. Generally faster (at least for RAID-0, back when I used
to benchmark this sort of thing
On Feb 1, 2012, at 1:04 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Qrux wrote:
I added a BLFS-style markdown page:
https://github.com/qrux/xlapp/blob/master/README-blfs.md
What you have is a pretty good start. I can take that and move it into
docbook form pretty quickly, but not soon.
No rush
The instructions on the svn LVM2 page could use a bit of updating.
The package isn't usable (at least according to docs) without certain options.
They're on the page, but they're not in the build commands. Also, there's some
nice info in the docs subdir of the tarball that don't get
On Feb 3, 2012, at 8:20 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Qrux wrote:
The instructions on the svn LVM2 page could use a bit of updating.
The package isn't usable (at least according to docs) without certain
options.
I've certainly been able to create, format, and mount an lvm partition...
Fair
On Jan 31, 2012, at 1:26 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
You know I added kvm-qemu to BLFS a couple of days ago, right?
I added a BLFS-style markdown page:
https://github.com/qrux/xlapp/blob/master/README-blfs.md
It tries to mimic the style of the BLFS book. I'm hoping it can make
On Jan 31, 2012, at 8:58 AM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
DJ Lucas wrote:
On 01/30/2012 10:47 AM, Tobias Gasser wrote:
Qrux schrieb:
You could include Xen. ;) And VirtualBox (though someone else would have
to write that bit).
i have a machine running lfs 6.x with virtualbox.
tobias
On Jan 31, 2012, at 1:26 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Qrux wrote:
On Jan 31, 2012, at 8:58 AM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
What are the advantages/disadvantages of VB over Xen and KVM? If it
doesn't add any significant capabilities, I don't see the effort to make
it fit into BLFS as useful.
I
On Jan 31, 2012, at 3:16 PM, DJ Lucas wrote:
On 01/31/2012 10:58 AM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
What are the advantages/disadvantages of VB over Xen and KVM? If it
doesn't add any significant capabilities, I don't see the effort to make
it fit into BLFS as useful.
-- Bruce
Note: I'm not
On Jan 31, 2012, at 4:42 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Qrux wrote:
At the moment, there's a large body of support and activity for both
Xen and KVM...KVM may be easier to deploy for graphical Guests; I've never
tried hosting one on Xen.
Well I can say that figuring out KVM (networking) wasn't
On Jan 27, 2012, at 3:08 AM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
OK, I've put together the attached scripts.
They seem to work for me. If there are errors, like doing
ifup br0; ifup br0
or
ifup br0; ifup eth0
or other out of order sequences, the error messages do not have a nice
format, but
On Nov 8, 2011, at 1:17 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
In the last three weeks, I have updated about 64 packages in BLFS. I
started to look ahead. This is where we stand:
Bruce,
What you've been doing lately has been commendable, and your effort amazing.
I'm sad that you've come to what appears
On Nov 8, 2011, at 5:06 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
effort (not to mention the innate combinatoric complexity of managing
references).
LOL. Did you *read* the last sentence? Try saying it out loud. :)
Haha--I do ramble, don't I? LOL
I'll try to be terse.
BLFS also has two products:
On Nov 6, 2011, at 10:48 AM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
I'm looking at upgrading postfix and want to discuss the page a bit:
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/svn/server/postfix.html
...
Fourth, the file ./src/util/sys_defs.h defines HAS_NIS. This causes
failure in a couple of
On Oct 17, 2011, at 9:42 PM, Ken Moffat wrote:
On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 08:58:07PM -0700, Qrux wrote:
At the end of the day, if you're absolutely forced to link your stuff with
X, and have to build it--or, you don't mind deploying X to your server, then
that's your call. I don't care. I'm
On Oct 17, 2011, at 10:56 PM, DJ Lucas wrote:
On 10/17/2011 11:42 PM, Ken Moffat wrote:
But, your core already appears to contain things that I have no
interest in, nor need for. The strength of BLFS has always been
that you can pick the things you want. The idea of a 'core' implies
it
On Oct 18, 2011, at 7:43 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
scrat wrote:
What help are you looking for?
The first step is to get general agreement on how to organize the book.
A simple table of contents for what packages should be in a non-gui
Volume I would be a good start.
Then a list of
Ken,
On Oct 17, 2011, at 7:38 PM, Ken Moffat wrote:
Let the desktop users decide how they want to recompile everything if
they want X support. Emacs builds fine (or at least, used to, back in
my day) without X. It also builds with X. Similarly, to the extent
that some packages depend
Howdy, all.
Long time user, first-time poster.
I've used [a-z]LFS in a HPC research environment. Now I'm considering using it
to deploy a Xen cluster (which is a great marriage of the slimness of LFS,
the idea of virtualization, and the new Xen support in the mainline kernel).
(I
51 matches
Mail list logo
