Re: [lfs-dev] New failure in coreutils tests

2012-05-13 Thread Olaf
On 2012-04-29 07:09, Matt Burgess wrote: On Sun, 2012-04-29 at 00:39 +0100, Ken Moffat wrote: I'm assuming this is from gnulib-tests/test-getlogin.c. Not seen this failure in my builds earlier this week, perhaps it's a one-off or perhaps something in the 3.3.4 headers has changed.

Re: [lfs-dev] problem of bootscript setclock

2012-05-13 Thread Bryan Kadzban
xinglp wrote: Now, It is the job of udev to start /etc/init.d/setclock . When I use initd-tools to install somethings else, it was installed for depended. Is there a way in these newfangled headers to say that setclock is really an alias for udev? That's what's happening in the scripts,

Re: [lfs-dev] problem of bootscript setclock

2012-05-13 Thread Bruce Dubbs
DJ Lucas wrote: On 05/13/2012 11:33 AM, Bryan Kadzban wrote: xinglp wrote: Now, It is the job of udev to start /etc/init.d/setclock . When I use initd-tools to install somethings else, it was installed for depended. Is there a way in these newfangled headers to say that setclock is really

Re: [lfs-dev] problem of bootscript setclock

2012-05-13 Thread xinglp
2012/5/14 Bryan Kadzban br...@kadzban.is-a-geek.net: xinglp wrote: Now, It is the job of udev to start /etc/init.d/setclock . When I use initd-tools to install somethings else, it was installed for depended. Is there a way in these newfangled headers to say that setclock is really an alias

Re: [lfs-dev] problem of bootscript setclock

2012-05-13 Thread DJ Lucas
On 05/13/2012 01:16 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote: DJ Lucas wrote: On 05/13/2012 11:33 AM, Bryan Kadzban wrote: xinglp wrote: Now, It is the job of udev to start /etc/init.d/setclock . When I use initd-tools to install somethings else, it was installed for depended. Is there a way in these