On 03/04/2010 01:22 AM, brown wrap wrote:
>
> These are my tar files:
>
> root [ /usr/local/xc/lib ]# ls -lt |grep tar
> -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 66828 Mar 3 17:06 xproto-7.0.16.tar.bz2
>
>
>
Do "pkg-config --modversion xproto". What's the result?
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo
These are my tar files:
root [ /usr/local/xc/lib ]# ls -lt |grep tar
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 66828 Mar 3 17:06 xproto-7.0.16.tar.bz2
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 21506 Mar 3 17:06 xextproto-7.1.1.tar.bz2
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 140071 Mar 3 17:05 inputproto-2.0.tar.bz2
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root
--- On Wed, 3/3/10, Chris Staub wrote:
> Well, I suppose something is being found if the build is
> complaining
> that the version isn't new enough. However, I just looked
> at the wget
> list for the Xorg Protocol headers and it says xproto
> should be 7.0.16,
> but according to your copied
> I don't see /usr/X11/lib/pkgconfig. I would guess
> that's what the
> "/usr/X11R6/lib/pkgconfig" is supposed to be?
yes, its the /usr/X11R6/lib/pkgconfig
And I have a links:
drwxr-xr-x 6 root root 4096 Feb 24 19:52 X11
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 8 Feb 24 20:52 X11R6 -> /usr/X11
lrwxrwxrw
On 03/04/2010 12:12 AM, Chris Staub wrote:
>>
>> Here are my two variables:
>>
>> root [ /blfs/libxml2-2.7.6 ]# echo $PKG_CONFIG_PATH
>> /usr/X11R6/lib/pkgconfig:/usr/local/lib/pkgconfig:/usr/X11/share/pkgconfig
>> root [ /blfs/libxml2-2.7.6 ]#
>>
>>
>
> I don't see /usr/X11/lib/pkgconfig. I would
zzf...@embarqmail.com wrote:
> Python-2.6.4 compiles without error , but the test suite fails:
>
> edited out non failure tests
Well, welcome to the "free software development" world. When
I first started using Linux several years ago, I was apalled
at the lack of concern over compile warning
On 03/04/2010 12:02 AM, brown wrap wrote:
>
>
>> You didn't specify what $XORG_PREFIX and $XORG_CONFIG
>> you're using, but
>> judging by that output it seems it is /usr/X11. I would
>> guess you've
>> probably missed the stuff on the Xorg Intro page about
>> updating $PATH
>> and $PKG_CONFIG_PATH.
> You didn't specify what $XORG_PREFIX and $XORG_CONFIG
> you're using, but
> judging by that output it seems it is /usr/X11. I would
> guess you've
> probably missed the stuff on the Xorg Intro page about
> updating $PATH
> and $PKG_CONFIG_PATH.
Here are my two variables:
root [ /blfs/libx
On 03/03/2010 11:30 PM, brown wrap wrote:
> I am trying to build the Xorg Libraries according to the order in the book,
> and using the script supplied. In the log file I point to, it keeps comming
> up with errors that it was looking for one version and found another. I am
> using the developem
I am trying to build the Xorg Libraries according to the order in the book, and
using the script supplied. In the log file I point to, it keeps comming up with
errors that it was looking for one version and found another. I am using the
developemental version of BLFS. I'm not sure many people ac
On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 12:36:11AM +, Ken Moffat wrote:
> afterthought (inflammatory) - are these the same
> python developers who thought sourcing files in the
> current directory was a good idea e.g. CVE-2008-4863,
> -5983 et seq, CVE-2009-0314 et seq. ? :)
I didn't know what CVE refered to
On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 12:36:11AM +, Ken Moffat wrote:
> On 3 March 2010 19:51, wrote:
>
> > So I'm a little confused . Python developers say to treat any failure as
> > serious but Gentoo disables a block of tests. The Python link above refers
> > to a svn version that worked. But too new
On 3 March 2010 19:51, wrote:
> So I'm a little confused . Python developers say to treat any failure as
> serious but Gentoo disables a block of tests. The Python link above refers
> to a svn version that worked. But too new can be as bad as too old.
>
> Since it's already installed, I'm going
Python-2.6.4 compiles without error , but the test suite fails:
edited out non failure tests
test_httpservers
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/lfs/sources/blfs/Python-2.6.4/Lib/CGIHTTPServer.py", line 255, in
run_cgi
os.execve(scriptfile, args, os.environ)
OSError: [Errno 13]
On 03/03/10 16:08, John Burrell wrote:
> If only Mesa, xorg-server and the xorg video drivers use the drm headers,
> then there is no point installing them from the kernel source in LFS. That
> way we would all know where we stand and libdrm can be a dependency for any
> package that uses the hea
> Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2010 14:19:25 +
> Subject: Re: libdrm-2.4.14 overwrites some drm linux-api-headers
> From: zarniwhoo...@googlemail.com
> To: blfs-support@linuxfromscratch.org
>
> On 3 March 2010 13:49, Aleksandar Kuktin wrote:
> > Then should libdrm be built as soon as possible when boo
>On Wed, 3 Mar 2010 15:25:16 +
>Ken Moffat wrote:
>
> On 3 March 2010 15:03, Matthew Burgess
> wrote:
> >> If by "as soon as possible" you mean "after the xorg libs,
> >> before Mesa / xorg-server / xorg video drivers" the answer
> >> is yes.
> >
> > Why "after xorg libs"? I generally build
On 3 March 2010 15:03, Matthew Burgess wrote:
>> If by "as soon as possible" you mean "after the xorg libs,
>> before Mesa / xorg-server / xorg video drivers" the answer
>> is yes.
>
> Why "after xorg libs"? I generally build libdrm very early on, largely due to
> its minimal dependency tree.
>
On Wed, 3 Mar 2010 14:19:25 +, Ken Moffat
wrote:
> On 3 March 2010 13:49, Aleksandar Kuktin wrote:
>> Then should libdrm be built as soon as possible when bootstrap building
>> BLFS so as to minimise the chance that some other package will build
>> against Linux drm headers? And try to preve
On 3 March 2010 13:49, Aleksandar Kuktin wrote:
> Then should libdrm be built as soon as possible when bootstrap building
> BLFS so as to minimise the chance that some other package will build
> against Linux drm headers? And try to prevent interface incompatibility
> in that way?
If by "as soon
>On Wed, 03 Mar 2010 00:04:25 -0600
>Mike McCarty wrote:
>
> Matthew Burgess wrote:
> > On a very new system (linux-2.6.33 + libdrm-2.4.18) I see the same
> > thing. Looking at the README in the tarball for libdrm:
> >
> > "New functionality in the kernel DRM drivers typically requires a
> > ne
On Tuesday 02 March 2010 09:50:00 pm Randy McMurchy wrote:
> lux-integ wrote these words on 03/02/10 13:18 CST:
> > I and having some difficulty compiling gcc-4.4.2 with ada. :-
>
> Have you attempted to use the instructions from the BLFS-dev book?
> I noticed your configure params are much di
22 matches
Mail list logo
