[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 2005/10/11 Tue PM 02:07:12 EDT alupu wrote:
PROBLEM: "undefined macro: AC_PROG_LIBTOOL" in FAM-2.7.0
Problem solved. Thank you.
Signing off,
-- Alex
How? What if someone has a similar problem searches the archive to find a
solution and all they find is `Problem
On 2005/10/11 Tue PM 02:07:12 EDT alupu wrote:
> PROBLEM: "undefined macro: AC_PROG_LIBTOOL" in FAM-2.7.0
Problem solved. Thank you.
Signing off,
-- Alex
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above in
On Tuesday 11 October 2005 17:02, Randy McMurchy wrote:
> Richard A Downing wrote these words on 10/11/05 15:52 CST:
> > Take tongue out of cheek. We are FAR better at keeping our
> > documentation up to date than the Kernel Developers who would rather
> > introduce a 'really neat bit of new code'
Richard A Downing wrote these words on 10/11/05 15:52 CST:
> Take tongue out of cheek. We are FAR better at keeping our
> documentation up to date than the Kernel Developers who would rather
> introduce a 'really neat bit of new code' than document the bloody
> important stuff they wrote last yea
Matthew Burgess wrote:
> Andrew Benton wrote:
>
>> True, but strangely the linux-2.6.14-rc4/README says
>>
>>> COMPILING the kernel:
>>>
>>> - Make sure you have gcc 2.95.3 available.
>>
>>
>>
>> Serves me right for looking. I haven't installed gcc-2.95 for a long time
>
>
> Andrew, you do real
--- Matthew Burgess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Andrew Benton wrote:
>
> > True, but strangely the linux-2.6.14-rc4/README says
> >
> >> COMPILING the kernel:
> >>
> >> - Make sure you have gcc 2.95.3 available.
> >
> > Serves me right for looking. I haven't installed gcc-2.95 for a long time
Andrew Benton wrote these words on 10/11/05 14:33 CST:
> True, but strangely the linux-2.6.14-rc4/README says
>
>>COMPILING the kernel:
>>
>> - Make sure you have gcc 2.95.3 available.
>
> Serves me right for looking. I haven't installed gcc-2.95 for a long time
Yes, the kernel docs are way out
Andrew Benton wrote:
True, but strangely the linux-2.6.14-rc4/README says
COMPILING the kernel:
- Make sure you have gcc 2.95.3 available.
Serves me right for looking. I haven't installed gcc-2.95 for a long time
Andrew, you do realise that us LFSers know far better than the kernel
dev
Randy McMurchy wrote:
That used to be the case, before NPTL came along. You cannot build
current (or even recent stable) versions of LFS using a kernel
generated by GCC-2.95.3.
True, but strangely the linux-2.6.14-rc4/README says
COMPILING the kernel:
- Make sure you have gcc 2.95.3 availa
PROBLEM: "undefined macro: AC_PROG_LIBTOOL" in FAM-2.7.0 (details below).
- Books:
LFS v6.1 All packages installed. No deviations. No errors.
BLFS v6.1 About 2/3 of packages installed. No deviations. No errors
(testimony to the professionalism and hard work of the developers).
- Relev
Nicholas Capitelli wrote these words on 10/11/05 13:00 CST:
> Just my 2 cents but isnt gcc-2.95.3 recommended by the
> kernel programmers to build the kernel. Its suppose to
> produce the most stable kernel since the kernel is
> written in C. I think that is definately a good reason
> to install g
--- Declan Moriarty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Recently, Somebody Somewhere wrote these words
> > Hi
> >
> > I recall that previous versions of BLFS or LFS (or
> maybe both)
> > recommended installing gcc-2.3.5 in addition to
> gcc3. I think there
> > were a few packages that didn't compile wit
I've compiled LFS from fairly recent SVNs with -O3 -march=i686 (and
-march=pentium-m) and have to say I'm hard pressed to notice any
difference from not changing any default optimizations. This is using
GCC-4 on a pentium-m 1.6 machine (A Dell Inspiron 9300). I read that
GCC4 has completely re-wr
On Tue, 11 Oct 2005, Brandin Creech wrote:
Now that gcc4 is out (and will be in the
next LFS stable release), I'm wondering--is it necessary (or a good idea,
even) to keep a copy of some gcc3 version. What about gcc2--is it necessary
to keep that (assuming we're Linux 2.6)?
Declan has alrea
Recently, Somebody Somewhere wrote these words
> Hi
>
> I recall that previous versions of BLFS or LFS (or maybe both)
> recommended installing gcc-2.3.5 in addition to gcc3. I think there
> were a few packages that didn't compile with gcc3, but did with
> gcc-2.3.5 (and I think that was the recom
Hi
I recall that previous versions of BLFS or LFS (or maybe both) recommended
installing gcc-2.3.5 in addition to gcc3. I think there were a few packages
that didn't compile with gcc3, but did with gcc-2.3.5 (and I think that was
the recommended gcc for Linux 2.4). Now that gcc4 is out (and will b
On Tue, 2005-10-11 at 07:46 -0700, Dan Nicholson wrote:
> Control-center --enable-aboutme bombed looking for libebook/e-book.h.
Thanks for the update, Dan. I will remove the --enable-aboutme
parameter. It's really a worthless tool anyway, I should never have
added this switch in the first place.
On Tue, 2005-10-11 at 23:34 +1300, Simon Geard wrote:
> Haven't investigated thoroughly yet, but reading the HAL mailing lists
> suggests the problem is probably related to changes in recent udev
> versions. At minimum, hotplug is partly broken, since it's no longer
> auto-loading usb-storage.
>
Hey Randy,
Control-center --enable-aboutme bombed looking for libebook/e-book.h. I
think this is in evolution, which I didn't install. Here's the error:
gnome-about-me.c:32:29: libebook/e-book.h: No such file or directory
Seems configure didn't really figure out whether I had evolution or no
Randy McMurchy wrote:
Dan Nicholson wrote these words on 10/11/05 00:36 CST:
Hey, that's fine. The core is the most important part, anyway. I
hadn't really thought about how ridiculous it would be to commit
changes to ~40 packages at once. This is totally fine. I'm willing
to sniff out some
On Tue, 2005-10-11 at 09:03 +0100, Declan Moriarty wrote:
> /Makes a mental note not to even open a gnome archive until someone says
> it's easy.
Oh, installing it is easy enough - it's just a lengthy process due to
the number of packages involved (60+). The problem is for those like
Randy who are
On Tue, 2005-10-11 at 00:58 -0500, Randy McMurchy wrote:
> I'm right now working on getting gnome-volume-manager into the book.
> This package, with a properly configured D-BUS/HAL installation,
> totally rocks.
That's excellent news. I've had HAL / G-V-M working almost perfectly on
a slightly old
On Tue, 2005-10-11 at 00:54 +0100, Andrew Benton wrote:
> Incidentally, if you build gnome-menus against Gamin and then uninstall it
> and use FAM, you'll need to reinstall gnome-menus as it breaks the gnome
> panel.
> Gnome-menus sets a compile time flag, FAMNoExists, according to whether you're
On Mon, 2005-10-10 at 17:20 -0500, Randy McMurchy wrote:
> Everything seems to work good except for Yelp, which is totally
> sucking for me, crashes every time I run it. I looked in GNOME's BZ,
> but can't see anything that stands out. Andy posted earlier this
> week that using a newer CVS version
Recently, Somebody Somewhere wrote these words
> Hey Randy,
>
> I was thinking about starting a GNOME 2.12 build soon, and I wanted to
> know how soon I might see your instructions in the SVN. If it won't
> be awhile, would you mind enlightening me with any gotchas I might see
> along the way? A
25 matches
Mail list logo
