Re: Rally the Troops LFS/BLFS/CLFS/Livecd too

2006-05-01 Thread Andrew Benton
Bryan Kadzban wrote: I thought iptables required the raw kernel source anyway? No, it builds fine with just the sanitised 2.6.12 llc headers. Andy -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: Rally the Troops LFS/BLFS/CLFS/Livecd too

2006-05-01 Thread Bryan Kadzban
Andrew Benton wrote: Bryan Kadzban wrote: I thought iptables required the raw kernel source anyway? No, it builds fine with just the sanitised 2.6.12 llc headers. I stand corrected then. (I really think it had a parameter to the kernel source tree in its make command, though; it

Re: Rally the Troops LFS/BLFS/CLFS/Livecd too

2006-05-01 Thread Ken Moffat
On Mon, May 01, 2006 at 10:11:31AM +0100, Andrew Benton wrote: And iproute2. With Jim and Jürg's script created headers I can't get ip to build. I've no idea what's broken in BLFS because I can't get out of LFS. I've built two clfs systems in the past few days (one, without any audio/video

Re: Rally the Troops LFS/BLFS/CLFS/Livecd too

2006-05-01 Thread Theo Schneider
Hi Andy, Andrew Benton schrieb: steve crosby wrote: iptables is one such application - currently non functional with jim's script created headers, but have yet to identify why. And iproute2. With Jim and Jürg's script created headers I can't get ip to build. I've no idea what's broken in

Re: audio group [was: Rally the Troops LFS/BLFS/CLFS/Livecd too

2006-05-01 Thread Kevin Buckley
At the risk of being considered as one these 1.) if you've got no idea whats been discussed in these mails - don't comment, we don't need a can I have wirless tools style posters, in which case I do apologise for butting in amongst those who aren't: I notice that Bruce Dubbs wrote

Re: Rally the Troops LFS/BLFS/CLFS/Livecd too

2006-05-01 Thread Chris Schwemmer
Andrew Benton wrote: And iproute2. With Jim and Jürg's script created headers I can't get ip to build. I've no idea what's broken in BLFS because I can't get out of LFS. I am running a complete LFS-SVN-20060418 system built with Jürg's headers and so far everything is fine. I'm at QT right

Re: Rally the Troops LFS/BLFS/CLFS/Livecd too

2006-05-01 Thread Bruce Dubbs
Bryan Kadzban wrote: that's what I get for building a firewall box against the 4.something or 5.0 book and then never updating it.) Why? Did it fail? Was there a security issue? Bottom line: you don't have to make upgrades unless there real reasons to do so, not just because a package was

Re: audio group [was: Rally the Troops LFS/BLFS/CLFS/Livecd too

2006-05-01 Thread Bruce Dubbs
Kevin Buckley wrote: To my mind, having a full list of of all the users and groups that BLFS users MIGHT require, presented to readers of an LFS book, is akin to going WBLFS - Way Beyond LFS. Have you read BLFS? Specifically, http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/cvs/postlfs/users.html

Re: audio group [was: Rally the Troops LFS/BLFS/CLFS/Livecd too

2006-05-01 Thread Randy McMurchy
Kevin Buckley wrote these words on 05/01/06 07:33 CST: a general discussion about users and groups in BLFS that educates folk as to why they MIGHT need some users and groups Beyond what LFS has provided I can see this added to the page on users and groups, but not a complete discussion.

Re: audio group [was: Rally the Troops LFS/BLFS/CLFS/Livecd too

2006-05-01 Thread Archaic
On Mon, May 01, 2006 at 10:00:16AM -0500, Randy McMurchy wrote: In my opinion, expecting someone to read the beginning discussion for each section is unreasonable. We provide some information here, but nothing critical to build, or use, a package. Why would it be unreasonable? If education

Re: Rally the Troops LFS/BLFS/CLFS/Livecd too

2006-05-01 Thread Jim Gifford
Andrew Benton wrote: steve crosby wrote: iptables is one such application - currently non functional with jim's script created headers, but have yet to identify why. And iproute2. With Jim and Jürg's script created headers I can't get ip to build. I've no idea what's broken in BLFS because I

Re: audio group [was: Rally the Troops LFS/BLFS/CLFS/Livecd too

2006-05-01 Thread Kevin Buckley
Kevin Buckley wrote: To my mind, having a full list of of all the users and groups that BLFS users MIGHT require, presented to readers of an LFS book, is akin to going WBLFS - Way Beyond LFS. Have you read BLFS? Specifically,

Re: Rally the Troops LFS/BLFS/CLFS/Livecd too

2006-05-01 Thread Andrew Benton
Jim Gifford wrote: Try Version 00.45, I built it with no issues, let me know. Where is that? http://ftp.jg555.com/headers/headers is showing version 00.37 at the moment. Andy -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See

Re: Rally the Troops LFS/BLFS/CLFS/Livecd too

2006-05-01 Thread Jim Gifford
Andrew Benton wrote: Jim Gifford wrote: Try Version 00.45, I built it with no issues, let me know. Where is that? http://ftp.jg555.com/headers/headers is showing version 00.37 at the moment. Andy http://headers.cross-lfs.org - I'll update that version right now, thanx. --

Re: Missing patch

2006-05-01 Thread Archaic
On Mon, May 01, 2006 at 10:39:02PM +0200, M.Canales.es wrote: Hi, The linux-2.6.16.11-utf8_input-1.patch patch is missing on the patches repo. Thanks for the heads up, Manuel. -- Archaic Want control, education, and security from your operating system? Hardened Linux From Scratch

Re: Missing patch

2006-05-01 Thread Archaic
On Mon, May 01, 2006 at 10:39:02PM +0200, M.Canales.es wrote: Hi, The linux-2.6.16.11-utf8_input-1.patch patch is missing on the patches repo. The patch is in the repo, but doesn't get copied over until the book re-renders. -- Archaic Want control, education, and security from your

Re: Measuring disk usage and build time.

2006-05-01 Thread Archaic
On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 03:10:04PM -0500, Randy McMurchy wrote: Yes, many are grossly wrong. Yes, and something that will be greatly helped along by jhalfs, but going back in memory to previous SBU threads, I believe it was decided that SMP machines would be quite skewed. Hyprethreading acts

Re: Missing patch

2006-05-01 Thread M.Canales.es
El Lunes, 1 de Mayo de 2006 22:48, Archaic escribió: The patch is in the repo, but doesn't get copied over until the book re-renders. Oh, right. jhalfs is trying to download it from http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/patches/lfs/development, of course. -- Manuel Canales Esparcia Usuario de LFS

Re: Measuring disk usage and build time.

2006-05-01 Thread M.Canales.es
El Lunes, 1 de Mayo de 2006 22:53, Archaic escribió: Yes, and something that will be greatly helped along by jhalfs, but going back in memory to previous SBU threads, I believe it was decided that SMP machines would be quite skewed. Hyprethreading acts like SMP (to what extent I'm not sure)

Re: Rally the Troops LFS/BLFS/CLFS/Livecd too

2006-05-01 Thread Bryan Kadzban
Bruce Dubbs wrote: Bryan Kadzban wrote: that's what I get for building a firewall box against the 4.something or 5.0 book and then never updating it.) Why? Did it fail? Was there a security issue? Well, I think there are security issues with Apache that I need to fix. But that wouldn't

Re: Rally the Troops LFS/BLFS/CLFS/Livecd too

2006-05-01 Thread Bruce Dubbs
Bryan Kadzban wrote: Bruce Dubbs wrote: Bryan Kadzban wrote: that's what I get for building a firewall box against the 4.something or 5.0 book and then never updating it.) Why? Did it fail? Was there a security issue? Well, I think there are security issues with Apache that I need to

autoconf test results before/after alpha merge

2006-05-01 Thread Archaic
I'm just getting around to diff my logs from the alpha merge and ran across these: -PASS: gettext.test -PASS: gettext2.test +SKIP: gettext.test +SKIP: gettext2.test @@ -323,13 +323,13 @@ -PASS: lex3.test +SKIP: lex3.test -PASS: lex5.test +SKIP: lex5.test PASS: libobj2.test PASS: libobj3.test

Re: autoconf test results before/after alpha merge

2006-05-01 Thread Chris Staub
Chris Staub wrote: Archaic wrote: I'm guessing you mean Automake, not Autoconf. In any case, it looks like it's because Automake is installed before Flex and Gettext. It was noted in the Dependencies Appendix that Automake uses Flex and Gettext in its testsuite, but I guess nobody (myself

Re: autoconf test results before/after alpha merge

2006-05-01 Thread Archaic
On Mon, May 01, 2006 at 06:15:50PM -0400, Chris Staub wrote: I'm guessing you mean Automake, not Autoconf. Yes, hasty in my typing. :) -- Archaic Want control, education, and security from your operating system? Hardened Linux From Scratch http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/hlfs --

Re: Finalizing the sanity checks

2006-05-01 Thread Jeremy Huntwork
Jeremy Huntwork wrote: Trying to close this ticket: http://wiki.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/ticket/1768 OK, here's a second go at it: http://linuxfromscratch.org/~jhuntwork/html-lfs-trunk/chapter06/readjusting.html and http://linuxfromscratch.org/~jhuntwork/html-lfs-trunk/chapter06/gcc.html

Fwd: Bash-3.1.17 gets lost looking for end of string in certain contexts

2006-05-01 Thread Richard
For the benefit of the community I copy you my email upstream due to a bug in Bash-3.1.17: it gets lost looking for end of string in certain contexts. Would be nice if other fellow participants of the list could confirm similar finding. I hope it's not just me... Richard

Re: Fwd: Bash-3.1.17 gets lost looking for end of string in certain contexts

2006-05-01 Thread Archaic
On Mon, May 01, 2006 at 09:05:44PM -0300, Richard wrote: For the benefit of the community I copy you my email upstream due to a bug in Bash-3.1.17: it gets lost looking for end of string in certain contexts. This issue was fixed around 3.1.10. If the patches were created properly by us

Re: Fwd: Bash-3.1.17 gets lost looking for end of string in certain contexts

2006-05-01 Thread Archaic
On Mon, May 01, 2006 at 06:37:39PM -0600, Archaic wrote: This issue was fixed around 3.1.10. If the patches were created properly by us and applied properly by you, then this should not happen. I'll look into it. Thanks for the report. Hrmm, the patch is right, and the only upstream patches