[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ryan,
I used your 3.1.1 cross-lfs scripts to build nice multiarch x86_64 system.
Had a couple of minor errors that were fixed once booted in native system.
heh, you'll get that ;-)
Some may already be fixed, a fair bit has changed since the 3.1.1
tarball...
One real problem
Ryan,
I used your 3.1.1 cross-lfs scripts to build nice multiarch x86_64 system.
Had a couple of minor errors that were fixed once booted in native system.
One real problem I couldn't overcome was trying to get your scripts to
build 64 bit only, no bi-arch. Never would build--always died on gcc.
Perhaps you already know, we help companies "Go Public". The President of our
company is a securities
and corporate lawyer.
Please visit our site to receive information regarding how any company can go
public. We have several
research reports available on this subject.
If you are aware of a com
El Sábado, 7 de Mayo de 2005 19:54, Jeremy Huntwork escribió:
> M.Canales.es wrote:
> > Many thanks for start that work :-)
>
> No problem, I sure could use your help though ;)
Very busy now reformating the BLFS sources.
But I need to add the tags & attributes use policies to explain the Index
s
M.Canales.es wrote:
Many thanks for start that work :-)
No problem, I sure could use your help though ;)
--
Jeremy Huntwork
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
El Sábado, 7 de Mayo de 2005 17:45, Jeremy Huntwork escribió:
> Take a look:
>
> http://linuxfromscratch.org/~jhuntwork/editor-manual/
>
Many thanks for start that work :-)
--
Manuel Canales Esparcia
Usuario de LFS nº2886: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org
LFS en castellano: http://www.esc
On Fri, 2005-05-06 at 23:30 -0600, Archaic wrote:
> On Fri, May 06, 2005 at 11:13:16PM -0600, Dennis J Perkins wrote:
> > I didn't like the network scripts, especially the ifconfig.* directory
> > structure.
>
> <..>
>
> > I would like the network scripts to be modular,
>
> <..>
>
> Without a d
Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
(Commit was too large to make it to lfs-book.)
OK, would you mind sending a summary to lfs-book then (just the log
message would do, I suppose). You could even make a note having to do
that in the "new and improved" editors guide on your next commit :)
Cheers,
Matt.
--
ht
Jim Gifford wrote:
As we know there are two packages in LFS that suffer the SuS V3
incompatibilies, I'm not sure of any distro's out there that are not
setting the coreutils to build to it's current POSIX level, but what if
one did.
Well, because of the pain currently involved, I doubt any distr
Matthew Burgess wrote:
Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
Matt, Gerard, any objections?
None at all, it's been on my TODO for ages, so I'd be glad for anyone to
commit anything to it at the moment :)
Great. :) Ok, just committed my changes and will start looking at the
text. (Commit was too large to make it
Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
http://linuxfromscratch.org/~jhuntwork/editor-manual/
Cool!
Was wondering if anyone minded if I went ahead and started editing the
actual content a bit to bring it up to speed, adding information that
I'm sure about.
Matt, Gerard, any objections?
None at all, it's been on
Hey Guys,
Checked out the oold copy of the editor's manual from the
repository, and cleaned up the xml a bit, added a Makefile and
stylesheets so that it looks/acts like the LFS book.
Take a look:
http://linuxfromscratch.org/~jhuntwork/editor-manual/
Was wondering if anyone minded if I went
Andreas Fehr wrote:
I guess, this list is as good as any other place.
Actually, the lfs-dev list is where development topics go, so book fixes
should be noted there. This list is for support. :) CC'ing this to
lfs-dev so it can be noted there for the record.
In chapter "6.2. Mounting Virtual Ker
On 07 May 2005, you wrote in lfs.dev:
>> -Message d'origine-
>>
>> I'm confused, or your using terminology I'm not understanding - by
>> definition, a default gateway is where I send packets that I don't
> know
>> how
>> to route - and therefore there can only be one "default gateway"
> -Message d'origine-
> De : [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:lfs-dev-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] De la part de Steve Crosby
> Envoyé : samedi 7 mai 2005 10:17
> À : LFS Developers Mailinglist
> Objet : Re: lfs-bootscripts (networking)
>
> On 07 May 2005, you wrote in lfs.dev:
>
> > Some notes as I att
> Also, I am trying to figure the purpose for the last check in the
> following line:
>
> if [ "${IN_HOTPLUG}" = "1" -a "${ONHOTPLUG}" != "yes" -a "${HOSTNAME}" !=
> "(none)" ]; then
>
> The first 2 are self explanatory, but when will $HOSTNAME ever equal
> (none)? It is set by the localnet script
On 07 May 2005, you wrote in lfs.dev:
> Some notes as I attempt to make the lfs bootscripts more
> wireless-friendly:
>
> Currently the networking scripts allow only for one default gateway.
> However, each interface should have it's own. When trying to do that
> manually with ip, it bombs. Since
17 matches
Mail list logo
