Greg Schafer wrote:
Tush, you have just clearly demonstrated you have no idea at all what
you're talking about on this topic.
I would kindly ask you to stop putting people down.
Unless you have the required level of experience and expertise in cross
compilation, you do not have a leg to st
Jim Gifford wrote:
> Not until a formal apology is posted. I want my name and LFS's name
> cleared of the allegations you brought up. I WILL NOT back down on this
> point.
Tough.
The facts speak for themselves, and you know it. I do not care anymore. If
you want to act like a 12 year old, go f
Greg Schafer wrote:
Ok, good. Can we get back to improving the build now? Can we please keep
development discussions on list please? There is plenty that needs to be
done and I have long list of things to address.
Not until a formal apology is posted. I want my name and LFS's name
cleared o
Jim Gifford wrote:
> Are you man enough to apologize for false allegations? Look through the
> threads on this discussion.
There are no false allegations.
> Unethical practices (That's calling the kettle black)
> No technical toolchain knowledge. (You have never talked with me, so you
> don't
Tushar Teredesai wrote:
> This is a very valid point IMO.
No, it is completely invalid. See below.
> Since the cross-LFS will most probably
> have the official LFS blessing,
Have you even looked at it? Let alone tried it? It has a long way to go.
> I would like it to have proper
> attribution.
On Sat, Jul 30, 2005 at 07:54:30PM +0100, Matthew Burgess wrote:
>
> Well, bashref.html is linked to from
> http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~matthew/LFS-references.html, which is
> itself linked to from chapter01/resources.html in the book. We could
> add a link to the full bash-doc tarball to
DJ Lucas wrote:
> Okay, this should be easy enough. Just which solution is better? Add
> /var/run/proftpd to createfiles, or modify proftpd to use /var/run. I
> lean toward the modification to use /var/run. What say the group?
>
> http://blfs-bugs.linuxfromscratch.org/show_bug.cgi?id=786
We d
Hi Roberts,
On 27 Jul 2005 21:21:33 you wrote:
When xorg is compiled find libXau.a and libXdmcp.a. Try something like
this:
mkdir /tmp/tmpstuff
cd /tmp/tmpstuff
ar -x /path/to/libXau.a
gcc -shared -o libXau.so *.o
install libXau.so /usr/X11R6/lib
and repeat that with libXdmcp.a (after cleari
On Sat, Jul 30, 2005 at 12:02:44PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>
> I hope not. Sometimes I am out of town and want to catch up. I don't
> like or have a notebook computer and sometimes am limited to using
> someone else's machine, perhaps with some other operating system. Being
> able to do a sub
Tushar Teredesai wrote:
On 7/30/05, Jim Gifford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Do you want to be associated with something that is utilizing unethical
practices, I don't think so.
This is a very valid point IMO. Since the cross-LFS will most probably
have the official LFS blessing, I wou
On 7/30/05, Jim Gifford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Do you want to be associated with something that is utilizing unethical
> practices, I don't think so.
>
This is a very valid point IMO. Since the cross-LFS will most probably
have the official LFS blessing, I would like it to have proper
at
Matthew Burgess wrote these words on 07/30/05 14:52 CST:
> Well, I'm all for conserving BZ numbers :) Sure, the patch would be
> great! Thanks.
Attached. I'm not sure if adding the tarball to the Packages file
was correct. If not, simply remove those lines.
--
Randy
rmlscsi: [GNU ld version
On Sat, 30 Jul 2005, Jaap Struyk wrote:
> Op za 30-07-2005, om 17:19 schreef Jaap Struyk:
>
> > What the 2 have in common is:
> > asm operand 1 probably doesn't match constraints
> > and
> > impossible constraint in `asm'
> > Both modules build fine on a clean kernel, but the errors don't make
> >
Randy McMurchy wrote:
BZ it, or just send you a patch to trunk?
I have the patch ready. :-)
Well, I'm all for conserving BZ numbers :) Sure, the patch would be
great! Thanks.
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: Se
Matthew Burgess wrote these words on 07/30/05 14:43 CST:
> M.Canales.es wrote:
>
>>The precedent is already here. We are dowloading the glibc-linuxthreads
>>package only to install the API manpages.
>
> Damn this all too knowledgable community! Thanks Manuel. Randy, care
> to bugzilla this?
M.Canales.es wrote:
The precedent is already here. We are dowloading the glibc-linuxthreads
package only to install the API manpages.
Damn this all too knowledgable community! Thanks Manuel. Randy, care
to bugzilla this?
Cheers,
Matt.
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-
El Sábado, 30 de Julio de 2005 20:54, Matthew Burgess escribió:
> Well, bashref.html is linked to from
> http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~matthew/LFS-references.html, which is
> itself linked to from chapter01/resources.html in the book. We could
> add a link to the full bash-doc tarball to the L
On Sat, 30 Jul 2005, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> This is a list of the remaining 6.1 bugs that need package updates:
>
> Bug Package Assigned to
>
> 1350 Kerberos
> 1369 Tidy Randy
> 1430 LIBPCAP
> 1443 Firefox
> 1444 Thunderbird Richard
> 1475 Ethereal Randy
> -
Bruce, I tak
On 7/30/05, Matthew Burgess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Randy McMurchy wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I'd like to make folks aware of something, and let this be discussed
> > and see if perhaps some action should be taken.
> >
> > There is a Bash-3.0 Docs tarball that can be downloaded which has
> > l
Matthew Burgess wrote these words on 07/30/05 13:54 CST:
> Well, bashref.html is linked to from
> http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~matthew/LFS-references.html, which is
> itself linked to from chapter01/resources.html in the book. We could
> add a link to the full bash-doc tarball to the LFS-r
On July 30, 2005 11:13 am, Jaap Struyk wrote:
> Can you explain the (un)zip assembly tweeks maybe (they are not (yet) in
> the book)?
In the makefile find the -DASM parts in the cflags and remove them.
> And why do some apps need to disable mmx? (or did I fully understand you
> wrong on that?)
A
Randy McMurchy wrote:
Hi all,
I'd like to make folks aware of something, and let this be discussed
and see if perhaps some action should be taken.
There is a Bash-3.0 Docs tarball that can be downloaded which has
lots of additional Bash docs in many formats. This tarball is rather
large (1.9 MB
Bryan Kadzban wrote:
Or just point to http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/
:)
(Although actually, I can see how having some sort of explanation might
be helpful. Would there be some way of automating that, though, so
nobody has to remember to update the list of summaries whenever the
r
Matthew Burgess wrote:
> we've got a fair few branches of LFS kicking around now. I think we
> could use something like GCC's "Active Development Branches" section
> of http://gcc.gnu.org/cvs.html to let people know about them.
Or just point to http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/
That's wh
> Seeing how the Bash documentation is expansive, it may be nice to have
> the HTML files installed, allowing folks to easily print and have
> browser search capability.
>
> What say the group?
I think it should be included for sure... :) If you're going to be doing
LFS, it probably means you'l
Hi all,
I'd like to make folks aware of something, and let this be discussed
and see if perhaps some action should be taken.
There is a Bash-3.0 Docs tarball that can be downloaded which has
lots of additional Bash docs in many formats. This tarball is rather
large (1.9 MB), and because if this t
David Fix wrote:
It's rendered on a daily basis at
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/gcc4/
AHA! :) That's what I was looking for! Thanks a ton!
Which reminds me...we've got a fair few branches of LFS kicking around
now. I think we could use something like GCC's "Active Developmen
> It's rendered on a daily basis at
> http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/gcc4/
AHA! :) That's what I was looking for! Thanks a ton!
Dave
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information pag
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 07/30/05 12:21 CST:
> This is a list of the remaining 6.1 bugs that need package updates:
>
> Bug Package Assigned to
>
> 1350 Kerberos
> 1369 Tidy Randy
> 1430 LIBPCAP
> 1443 Firefox
> 1444 Thunderbird Richard
> 1475 Ethereal Randy
> -
Randy McMurchy wrote these words on 07/30/05 11:47 CST:
> Noted in the Chapter 5 instructions for Tar in the GCC-4 book is
> an instruction to install a patch (gcc4_fix_tests). The text describing
> this patch is inaccurate because this patch is not required to build
> or install the package.
>
>
Randy McMurchy wrote:
David Fix wrote these words on 07/30/05 11:56 CST:
Sorry that I'm a bit off topic... :) Where can I view the GCC-4 branch of
the book? I'd be interested in giving some feedback about it! :)
>
I don't know if it is available on Belgarath and mirrors as
HTML, I didn't
This is a list of the remaining 6.1 bugs that need package updates:
Bug Package Assigned to
1350 Kerberos
1369 Tidy Randy
1430 LIBPCAP
1443 Firefox
1444 Thunderbird Richard
1475 Ethereal Randy
-
Randy, you are the most knowledeable of the editors on Kerberos. Its a
P1
Randy McMurchy wrote these words on 07/30/05 11:41 CST:
> Is this patch required?
>
> If not, perhaps it should be removed from the list of patches.
Looking at the ChangeLog it appears this patch is no longer used,
so I've attached a patch to fix the branch sources.
--
Randy
rmlscsi: [GNU ld
> I find it easiest to check out the SVN sources and render the book
> myself. It is easier to stay with a consistent version that way, if
> desired. I don't know if it is available on Belgarath and mirrors as
> HTML, I didn't check.
>
> I also plan on being as helpful as possible and sending in p
David Fix wrote these words on 07/30/05 11:56 CST:
> Sorry that I'm a bit off topic... :) Where can I view the GCC-4 branch of
> the book? I'd be interested in giving some feedback about it! :)
I find it easiest to check out the SVN sources and render the book
myself. It is easier to stay wit
Matthew Burgess wrote:
> NNTP stuff has caused us a number of problems over time. It therefore
> might just be more economical to ditch the whole thing. Watch this space!
I hope not. Sometimes I am out of town and want to catch up. I don't
like or have a notebook computer and sometimes am lim
> -Original Message-
> Sent: Saturday, July 30, 2005 12:41 PM
> Subject: GCC-4.0.1 patch (no_fixincludes)
>
> Hi all,
>
> Noted in the list of required patches in the GCC-4 branch is the
> gcc-4.0.1-no_fixincludes-1.patch patch. However, this patch does not
> seem to be referenced in the
Hi all,
Noted in the Chapter 5 instructions for Tar in the GCC-4 book is
an instruction to install a patch (gcc4_fix_tests). The text describing
this patch is inaccurate because this patch is not required to build
or install the package.
The patch is only required if you run the test-suite. Perha
Hi all,
Noted in the list of required patches in the GCC-4 branch is the
gcc-4.0.1-no_fixincludes-1.patch patch. However, this patch does not
seem to be referenced in the text of the book to ever be installed.
Is this patch required?
If not, perhaps it should be removed from the list of patches.
Joachim Beckers wrote:
What do you mean with "a while"? Is it like a whole week or just a
couple of hours?
Depends on whether my planned approach works. If I've thought about
things correctly, it should be a couple of hours. Having said that, the
NNTP stuff has caused us a number of proble
Gerard Beekmans wrote:
Well that does change things a bit. If the developers don't have it
figured out yet, let's then maintain the status quo for now?
That's the main reason I haven't upgraded shadow yet. Recent versions
seem to have a number of bugs, and this one, whilst certainly not a
s
Matthew Burgess wrote:
> Richard A Downing wrote:
>
>> Is there any realistic expectation that the facility to write to the
>> lists via the NNTP service will be fixed? There is also a suggestion
>> that it might be withdrawn.
>
> I came up with a plan that may well have fixed NNTP, but have bee
42 matches
Mail list logo
