Hi all,
I'm wondering why LFS still uses a symlinked xsl-stylesheets-current
target for stylesheets instead of a hard-coded version number. I'm
looking at different versions of the LFS rendering Makefile and they
point to this current symlink.
As we go forward, won't it be difficult to re-render
Archaic wrote:
> I see now what you are saying and agree. However, this sort of
> information seems most useful to developers and the more
> highly advanced
> readers. Perhaps a note should be placed in chap5's intro linking to
> this advanced information with a caveat that it isn't needed for a
>
On 4/8/06, Jürg Billeter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Ah, you're talking about mounting on demand, I don't call that
> automounting as it can be misleading. So as recap, what I call
> automounting is: plug in your usb stick, do nothing, stick gets mounted
> (optionally window appears with content
On 4/8/06, Jeremy Huntwork <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 08, 2006 at 06:33:39PM +0200, M.Canales.es wrote:
> > In that case I would suggest 6.6 Creating Essential Symlinks (and files). I
> > think that could fit better here.
>
> Well, if we're changing that page from just Essential Symli
El Sábado, 8 de Abril de 2006 18:54, Jeremy Huntwork escribió:
> Well, if we're changing that page from just Essential Symlinks to
> Essential Symlinks and Files, then we might as well merge that page with
> 6.7 because, in my mind, 6.7 as it is really could be renamed to
> 'Creating Essential Fil
On Sat, Apr 08, 2006 at 06:33:39PM +0200, M.Canales.es wrote:
> In that case I would suggest 6.6 Creating Essential Symlinks (and files). I
> think that could fit better here.
Well, if we're changing that page from just Essential Symlinks to
Essential Symlinks and Files, then we might as well mer
El Sábado, 8 de Abril de 2006 18:24, Jeremy Huntwork escribió:
> My reasoning is that 1) /etc/mtab isn't really anything to do with the
> other kernfs mounts, 2) we already create /etc in 6.5 "Creating
> Directories" and that fits there - there's no real need to create /etc
> any earlier 3) by sec
On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 01:37:07PM -0700, Dan Nicholson wrote:
> I think it should go right with the mount commands so there is no
> confusion. Also, we don't know whether another package depends upon
> an mtab file being present. To me, it's safest to add
>
> mkdir -pv ${LFS}/etc
> touch ${LFS}
Jürg Billeter wrote:
Ah, you're talking about mounting on demand, I don't call that
automounting as it can be misleading. So as recap, what I call
automounting is: plug in your usb stick, do nothing, stick gets mounted
(optionally window appears with content). You call automounting: plug in
your
Ag Hatzim wrote:
That was it Chris.
And as i was looking to configure (line 24735),i found the cause of this.
There is an undocumanted switch --enable-install-setuid.
And since the BLFS policy is to built as non-root user,then maybe we
have to enable by default.
Okay..then I'm sorry I misunder
On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 01:37:07PM -0700, Dan Nicholson wrote:
> I think it should go right with the mount commands so there is no
> confusion. Also, we don't know whether another package depends upon
> an mtab file being present. To me, it's safest to add
>
> mkdir -pv ${LFS}/etc
> touch ${LFS}
Joe Ciccone wrote:
I havn't been following this thread too closely
No kidding...
but, from what I can
tell about the way dbus/hal are integrated into the system. Without them
I don't know how much hardware interaction the software will have. When
you plug in your usb drive it won't be detecte
Dan Nicholson wrote:
I think it's useful for anyone. The first time I built the book, it
seemed some random collection of utilities (not quite, but you get the
point). If this dependency info had been available I think I would
have been able to understand the connection of the tools a bit bett
13 matches
Mail list logo
