Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> I am wondering about making a change to LFS to combine some of the root
> directories and /usr. Looking at the sizes on a fairly complete system:
>
> 22M /lib
> 4.9M/bin
> 7.6M/sbin
> 1.4G/usr/lib
> 300M/usr/bin
> 15M /usr/sbin
>
> It seems like the
On 03.10.2012 01:42, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> I am wondering about making a change to LFS to combine some of the root
> directories and /usr. Looking at the sizes on a fairly complete system:
>
> 22M /lib
> 4.9M/bin
> 7.6M/sbin
> 1.4G/usr/lib
> 300M/usr/bin
> 15M /usr/sbin
>
>
[Whee, I didn't see this yesterday. Stupid mail server. :-)]
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> The sysfs filesystem was mentioned briefly above. One may wonder how
> sysfs knows about the devices present on a system and what device
> numbers should be used for them. Drivers that have been compiled into
> t
Ken Moffat wrote:
> (changing the subject)
>
> On Tue, Oct 02, 2012 at 06:32:14PM +0100, Ken Moffat wrote:
>> I see that Bryan has a 'fork' of standalone udev (I guess that just
>> means his own branch), and at least one of his commits has gone
>> into standalone.
Yeah, my own branch. (Side note
On Oct 2, 2012, at 8:58 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>>
>
> How small are the drives you are actually using? If a drive fails,
> can
> a new one be purchased? I guess so. The smallest I can find is 80 GB
> for $16, but it would probably cost almost as much for the 5.25
> adapter
> to 3.5. Also,
William Harrington wrote:
>
> On Oct 2, 2012, at 6:42 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>
>> I am wondering about making a change to LFS to combine some of the
>> root
>> directories and /usr. Looking at the sizes on a fairly complete
>> system:
>>
>> 22M /lib
>> 4.9M/bin
>> 7.6M/sbin
>> 1.4G
On Oct 2, 2012, at 6:42 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> I am wondering about making a change to LFS to combine some of the
> root
> directories and /usr. Looking at the sizes on a fairly complete
> system:
>
> 22M /lib
> 4.9M/bin
> 7.6M/sbin
> 1.4G/usr/lib
> 300M/usr/bin
> 15M
On Oct 2, 2012, at 6:04 PM, Baho Utot wrote:
Lucky you. Until I get a LFS/BLFS desktop running I am stuck with
cgroups
Actually, the direction isn't with linux, it's with something other
than linux.
You can run the linux kernel with cgroups, you can run it without
anything.
Do not gro
Baho Utot wrote:
> On 10/02/2012 07:42 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>> I am wondering about making a change to LFS to combine some of the root
>> directories and /usr. Looking at the sizes on a fairly complete system:
>>
>> 22M /lib
>> 4.9M/bin
>> 7.6M/sbin
>> 1.4G/usr/lib
>> 300M/us
On 10/02/2012 07:42 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> I am wondering about making a change to LFS to combine some of the root
> directories and /usr. Looking at the sizes on a fairly complete system:
>
> 22M /lib
> 4.9M/bin
> 7.6M/sbin
> 1.4G/usr/lib
> 300M/usr/bin
> 15M /usr/sbin
>
I am wondering about making a change to LFS to combine some of the root
directories and /usr. Looking at the sizes on a fairly complete system:
22M /lib
4.9M/bin
7.6M/sbin
1.4G/usr/lib
300M/usr/bin
15M /usr/sbin
It seems like the space needed for /usr is really not that
On 10/02/2012 06:35 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Baho Utot wrote:
>
>> I am just getting aggravated with the direction of linux with the
>> cgroups etc.
> # CONFIG_CGROUPS is not set
Lucky you. Until I get a LFS/BLFS desktop running I am stuck with cgroups
>
>> I'll be glad when I get LFS/BLFS built
Baho Utot wrote:
> I am just getting aggravated with the direction of linux with the
> cgroups etc.
# CONFIG_CGROUPS is not set
> I'll be glad when I get LFS/BLFS built to KDE so I can ditch distros.
Try xfce. The build is faster and it seems to run cleanly without a lot
of unwanted bells and
On 10/02/2012 12:39 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Baho Utot wrote:
>
>> If Lennart and redhat succeed in moving linux to systemd I am moving to
>> *BSD. I have talked to many BSD developers ( there was a linux fest on
>> saturday here) and they plan on sticking to a "scripts" base init
>> system. I am
On Tue, Oct 02, 2012 at 02:42:57PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>
> Ken, I'm not sure I follow. At least in -193, there is no autogen.sh.
> I can't find a standalone-udev tarball with google. I also think our
> methodology is a bit cleaner, especially since BLFS builds gudev and
> keymap (fro
On Mon, 2012-10-01 at 21:54 -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> I'm working on rewriting part of Section 7.4 - Device and Module
> Handling on an LFS System. This is what I have right now, but would
> like comments.
Looks good, Bruce. Just to minor typos (one of which was in the
original!):
> 7.4.2.2
Ken Moffat wrote:
> (changing the subject)
>
> On Tue, Oct 02, 2012 at 06:32:14PM +0100, Ken Moffat wrote:
>> I see that Bryan has a 'fork' of standalone udev (I
>> guess that just means his own branch), and at least one of his
>> commits has gone into standalone.
>
> If anyone wants to play
(changing the subject)
On Tue, Oct 02, 2012 at 06:32:14PM +0100, Ken Moffat wrote:
>I see that Bryan has a 'fork' of standalone udev (I
> guess that just means his own branch), and at least one of his
> commits has gone into standalone.
If anyone wants to play with standalone-udev, use ./aut
On Tue, Oct 02, 2012 at 11:23:12AM -0400, Baho Utot wrote:
>
> Ugh,
>
> If Lennart and redhat succeed in moving linux to systemd I am moving to
> *BSD. I have talked to many BSD developers ( there was a linux fest on
> saturday here) and they plan on sticking to a "scripts" base init
> system
Baho Utot wrote:
> If Lennart and redhat succeed in moving linux to systemd I am moving to
> *BSD. I have talked to many BSD developers ( there was a linux fest on
> saturday here) and they plan on sticking to a "scripts" base init
> system. I am currently looking at their udev "replacement/work
On 02.10.2012 17:25, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>> multimedia/videoutils/transcode.xml (!)
>
> Looking at the development site, there doesn't seem to be any activity
> in almost a year. I don't see any packages linking to transcode.
> Should we just archive it?
>
> -- Bruce
>
I have nothing against t
Chris W. wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I wanted to better understand the inner workings of systemd. Just having
> finished a LFS install on a test server, I thought LFS 7.2 might be a
> good basis for this. My goal was to eventually replace SysVinit
> completely with systemd. I fully expected lots of things
Armin K. wrote:
> Anyways, I've checked building some packages against FFmpeg 1.0.
>
> Following packages link to FFmpeg:
>
> general/graphlib/gegl.xml [*]
> general/sysutils/strigi.xm
> multimedia/videoutils/transcode.xml (!)
Looking at the development site, there doesn't seem to be any activity
On 10/02/2012 10:14 AM, Chris W. wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I wanted to better understand the inner workings of systemd. Just having
> finished a LFS install on a test server, I thought LFS 7.2 might be a
> good basis for this. My goal was to eventually replace SysVinit
> completely with systemd. I fully
On Tue, 2 Oct 2012 14:14:26 + (UTC), Chris W.
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I wanted to better understand the inner workings of systemd. Just having
> finished a LFS install on a test server, I thought LFS 7.2 might be a
> good basis for this.
>
> I hope you'll find this guide helpful and would we
On Mon, Oct 01, 2012 at 11:03:50PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Ken Moffat wrote:
>
> >>>I don't follow systemd, no doubt some of the changes are important
> >>> for the project, but without monitoring it I can't guess which, if
> >>> any, impact the udev part. I'm still hoping that standalone
Hello,
I wanted to better understand the inner workings of systemd. Just having
finished a LFS install on a test server, I thought LFS 7.2 might be a
good basis for this. My goal was to eventually replace SysVinit
completely with systemd. I fully expected lots of things to break, but
was pleasantl
27 matches
Mail list logo
