On Thu Nov 29, 2001 at 11:51:22PM -0600, David Douthitt wrote:
> On 11/29/01 at 10:11 PM, Erik Andersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Do you happen to be using busybox with uClibc?
>
> I looked again, examined sources, and got this new information:
>
> 1. Busybox - all versions tested - were
On Thu Nov 29, 2001 at 11:22:14PM -0600, David Douthitt wrote:
> On 11/29/01 at 10:11 PM, Erik Andersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Do you happen to be using busybox with uClibc?
>
> Yes, indeed. Is that the trouble?
Yup. uClibc timezone support is pretty much all stubbed out
(hense the
On 11/29/01 at 10:11 PM, Erik Andersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Do you happen to be using busybox with uClibc?
I looked again, examined sources, and got this new information:
1. Busybox - all versions tested - were using uClibc.
2. uClibc contains this snippet in libc/misc/time/mktime.c:
On 11/29/01 at 10:11 PM, Erik Andersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Do you happen to be using busybox with uClibc?
Yes, indeed. Is that the trouble?
--
David Douthitt
UNIX Systems Administrator
HP-UX, Unixware, Linux
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
Leaf-devel
On Thu Nov 29, 2001 at 10:52:52PM -0600, David Douthitt wrote:
> I've been working on a problem with the date/time. Given the
> appropriate /etc/localtime file and /usr/share/zoneinfo tree, GNU
> /bin/date works - but busybox date does not (both 0.60.1 and 0.60.0).
> I don't know why. I updated
I've been working on a problem with the date/time. Given the
appropriate /etc/localtime file and /usr/share/zoneinfo tree, GNU
/bin/date works - but busybox date does not (both 0.60.1 and 0.60.0).
I don't know why. I updated /etc/timezone to create /etc/localtime
and /usr/share/zoneinfo/localti
KP Kirchdörfer wrote:
>
> In case you haven't seen it:
>
> http://oss.software.ibm.com/developer/opensource/linux/projects/minilibc/
>
> According to the the README minilibc will check all dependencies of the
> applications and glibc, and then produces a libc.so as small as possible.
>
> The a
Charles Steinkuehler wrote:
>
> > > The next version will likely use /dev/cdrom, and intelligently make that
> > > a symlink to the first found CD-Rom.
> >
> > I wrote a shell script that returns all found IDE cdroms by scanning
> > through /proc/ide - interested?
>
> Sure!
Here it is:
#!/bin/
In case you haven't seen it:
http://oss.software.ibm.com/developer/opensource/linux/projects/minilibc/
According to the the README minilibc will check all dependencies of the
applications and glibc, and then produces a libc.so as small as possible.
The author has tested minilibc with glibc 2.1
> > The next version will likely use /dev/cdrom, and intelligently make that
a
> > symlink to the first found CD-Rom.
>
> I wrote a shell script that returns all found IDE cdroms by scanning
> through /proc/ide - interested?
Sure!
> How do you go about finding a SCSI CDROM? All of our systems a
Charles Steinkuehler wrote:
> The next version will likely use /dev/cdrom, and intelligently make that a
> symlink to the first found CD-Rom.
I wrote a shell script that returns all found IDE cdroms by scanning
through /proc/ide - interested?
> This will work for PKGPATH as well, and
> I think
> I fired it (the Real Thing) up - pretty startup picture :)
>
> It's something else watching things fly (using a CDROM on a Pentium 200)
> when you're used to a floppy disk on a 486 :)
Yeah, kind of fun, isn't it?
> However, I noticed that /dev/hda is hardcoded into /etc/modules;
> couldn't thi
>Luis F. Correia wrote:
>> Dunno, I got them from the RedHat CD.
>>
>> One thing to take in account is the name may be different, but the
>> words 'compat' and '5.2' must be present.
>>
>> On RedHat 7.1 and 7.2 there are other 'compat' libraries in which the
>> names change to '6.2'
>That's
I fired it (the Real Thing) up - pretty startup picture :)
It's something else watching things fly (using a CDROM on a Pentium 200)
when you're used to a floppy disk on a 486 :)
However, I noticed that /dev/hda is hardcoded into /etc/modules;
couldn't this use /proc/cmdline and use the BOOT valu
Luis F. Correia wrote:
> Dunno, I got them from the RedHat CD.
>
> One thing to take in account is the name may be different, but the words
> 'compat' and '5.2' must be present.
>
> On RedHat 7.1 and 7.2 there are other 'compat' libraries in which the names
> change to '6.2'
That's because 5.2
>On 11/29/01 at 9:38 AM, Luis.F.Correia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>> After a sucessfull install, I booted and installed the extra
>> 'compat' rpms. As a note, one should use the RPM's stated in
>> http://www.redhat.com/knowledgebase/glibccompat/building.html
>Are they the same as the ones on t
> I looked a bit - turns out what I thought was Dachstein was really
> LRP-CD 1.1 ISO :)
>
> I couldn't find any reference to the Dachstein CD on
> http://lrp.steinkuehler.net - though I found references in the updates
> page. I looked all over - found the Dachstein floppy image, but no
> CDROM.
I looked a bit - turns out what I thought was Dachstein was really
LRP-CD 1.1 ISO :)
I couldn't find any reference to the Dachstein CD on
http://lrp.steinkuehler.net - though I found references in the updates
page. I looked all over - found the Dachstein floppy image, but no
CDROM. Finally I ha
On 11/29/01 at 9:38 AM, Luis.F.Correia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> After a sucessfull install, I booted and installed the extra
> 'compat' rpms. As a note, one should use the RPM's stated in
> http://www.redhat.com/knowledgebase/glibccompat/building.html
Are they the same as the ones on the LR
Ok, let's start:
I grabbed a RedHat 7.0 CD and installed a custom system with
only the 'Kernel devel, Devel and Utilities' selected.
After a sucessfull install, I booted and installed the extra
'compat' rpms. As a note, one should use the RPM's stated in
http://www.redhat.com/knowledgebase/gli
20 matches
Mail list logo
