I hope you are all well.
Glibc-2.16.0 has been released
http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/glibc/glibc-2.16.0.tar.xz
The good news is that it no longer needs the patches that are in
current LFS. However, there are still some problems with it. Firstly,
the libgcc_s.so issue:
On Tue, 01 May 2012 20:05:54 +0100
Ken Moffat zarniwh...@ntlworld.com wrote:
My shiny new LFS system is heading for /dev/null. That's ok, it
was only a test of current packages, but I must admit I'd hoped to
keep it for a week or two.
The reason is that although I've built everything
Hello All
From the that's what you get for touching that dept:
I've been testing the development versions of gcc and glibc (from svn
and git) and lately I've seen some breakage related to libgcc_s.so.
Current Glibc fails to build with a LD cannot find -lgcc_s error.
Grepping the source for
On Mon, 25 Jun 2012 16:14:00 +0100
Okrah Asante okrah.asant...@gmail.com wrote:
hello world,
i am going throug lfs 7.1 and cannot make after configuring glibc 2.15
with an error : *configure: error: gcc must provide the cpuid.h header.
*how can solve this problem.
This is the development
On Thu, 14 Jun 2012 17:19:18 +0100
Bruce Dubbs bruce.du...@gmail.com wrote:
I've been watching the mailing lists and William Hubbs has been trying
to get a set of patches into systemd for several days. He is being
ignored by upstream AFAICT. They have seemed quite arrogant about it in
On Wed, 06 Jun 2012 03:32:04 +0100
Fernando de Oliveira fam...@yahoo.com.br wrote:
I have built linux-3.4.1 in five machines. No problems, as with the
unstable 3.4.0, which required a patch or sed for one of the machines.
One can see in https://www.kernel.org/:
Latest Stable Kernel:
On Mon, 04 Jun 2012 22:30:29 +0100
Jeremy Huntwork jhuntw...@lightcubesolutions.com wrote:
The current headers-install command in the kernel tree is a perl script,
but there exists a patch to replace it with a very simple shell script
(and I believe the intent is to submit it upstream).
On Thu, 31 May 2012 13:22:00 +0100
Andrew Benton a...@benton.eu.com wrote:
When they merged udev and systemd they said that it'd be possible to
install just udev without systemd but with the very first merged
release it is impossible to install udev without all of systemd's
dependencies
On Fri, 01 Jun 2012 18:39:59 +0100
Bruce Dubbs bruce.du...@gmail.com wrote:
I am of the opinion that we should re-introduce pkg-config into LFS. I
think it would make things simplier for both LFS and BLFS.
pkg-config would make building kmod, libpipeline, man-db, and
udev/systemd all
On Fri, 01 Jun 2012 18:39:59 +0100
Bruce Dubbs bruce.du...@gmail.com wrote:
The current version, Dan's version, and the 'lite' verion all fail the
same test for me.
I get the same test failure with both pkg-config-0.26 and
pkg-config-lite-0.26-1. With both of them I can make all tests pass if
On Sat, 02 Jun 2012 00:34:51 +0100
Ken Moffat zarniwh...@ntlworld.com wrote:
2. but then make dies at
CC src/shared/libsystemd_units_la-install.lo
In file included from src/shared/path-lookup.h:33:0,
from src/shared/install.c:33:
./src/core/manager.h:28:23: fatal
On Thu, 31 May 2012 00:58:08 +0100
Ken Moffat zarniwh...@ntlworld.com wrote:
Actually, for some of us they *are* scary. I thought I was making
some progress (persuaded autoreconf to complete without errors using
the attached -A.patch), but then configure went into an infinite
loop spewing
On Thu, 31 May 2012 14:05:19 +0100
Dan Nicholson dbn.li...@gmail.com wrote:
Here's an update. I forgot that [] are quotes in autoconf, so you
usually end up using test instead. I still didn't test it works all
the way, but I think configure should run.
Withthis patch automake fails with:
On Thu, 31 May 2012 16:58:00 +0100
Bruce Dubbs bruce.du...@gmail.com wrote:
Try this diff for configure.ac.
It helps. I can get through configure Ok, but I can't see a way to get
through make without dbus.
Andy
udev-only.patch
Description: Binary data
--
On Thu, 31 May 2012 22:20:25 +0100
Bruce Dubbs bruce.du...@gmail.com wrote:
Well Dan, I've run into a problem with autoconf that I can't figure out
how to solve. configure.ac has several lines like:
PKG_CHECK_MODULES(KMOD, [libkmod = 5])
Now that's a reasonable check, but requires
On Thu, 31 May 2012 22:51:28 +0100
Bruce Dubbs bruce.du...@gmail.com wrote:
Did you try in a Chapter 6 environment? I can't get it to work without
pkg-config.
No, I think your make.sh is a better bet for an LFS Chapter 6 build.
Andy
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
On Thu, 31 May 2012 22:38:21 +0100
Jeremy Huntwork jhuntw...@lightcubesolutions.com wrote:
Since when does glib require Python?
I think Python's been a required dep since glib-2.32. It may be
possible to build glib without python but it will need more than
configure switches.
Are you using
On Thu, 31 May 2012 23:03:17 +0100
s...@slohj.org wrote:
I've created a patch to systemd-183/{Makefile.am,configure.ac}.
No dbus, pam, tcp-wrappers. Only kmod and blkid needed.
It strips out everything but libudev, udevadmin, and udevd ( now called
that again), rules, helpers, and tests.
On Thu, 31 May 2012 23:49:25 +0100
Jeremy Huntwork jhuntw...@lightcubesolutions.com wrote:
Check these out:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/pkgconfiglite/
That looks good. It installs /usr/share/aclocal/pkg.m4 which we need.
This is pkg-config-lite-0.26-1, based on pkg-config-0.26.
On Tue, 29 May 2012 17:52:34 +0100
Fernando de Oliveira fam...@yahoo.com.br wrote:
Now, I see i forgot the patch? Please, find it attached
If you decide to use it (3.4 compiles fine for me BTW), the change
could be made with a sed:
sed -i '/__iommu_table/a\\t(jiffies|jiffies_64)|' \
On Fri, 18 May 2012 10:28:11 +0100
Qrux qrux@gmail.com wrote:
On May 17, 2012, at 7:06 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Since you are using Applemail, I think the problem is that it is using \r
for
newlines instead of \n. I see your mail wrapped, but when replying, it
doesn't
wrap
On Fri, 11 May 2012 00:11:47 +0100
Ken Moffat zarniwh...@ntlworld.com wrote:
But looking at upstream git it's already
fixed in configure.ac:
case $host_cpu in
i?86*) RESIZECONS_PROGS=yes ;;
x86_64*) RESIZECONS_PROGS=yes ;;
*) RESIZECONS_PROGS=no ;;
esac
Hello All,
There's a rather ill natured thread on LFS Support at the moment called
Chapter 5 questions. Scott Robertson has made an interesting point:
On Fri, 04 May 2012 11:35:32 +0100
Scott Robertson scottrobertso...@yahoo.com wrote:
But do you not see from a newcomers
perspective that
On Wed, 02 May 2012 01:41:47 +0100
Ken Moffat zarniwh...@ntlworld.com wrote:
The downside was that I got one new (to me) test failure in
iconvdata:
make[2]: *** [/usr/src/glibc-build/iconvdata/tst-tables.out] Error 1
make[1]: *** [iconvdata/tests] Error 2
make[2]:
On Tue, 01 May 2012 20:05:54 +0100
Ken Moffat zarniwh...@ntlworld.com wrote:
My shiny new LFS system is heading for /dev/null. That's ok, it
was only a test of current packages, but I must admit I'd hoped to
keep it for a week or two.
The reason is that although I've built everything
On Tue, 01 May 2012 23:12:16 +0100
Matt Burgess matt...@linuxfromscratch.org wrote:
This is upstream bug 13579
(http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13579) and the
attached patch should fix it. Would you mind giving it a try please?
The patch attached to that bug is
On Mon, 23 Apr 2012 21:38:19 +0100
Jeremy Huntwork jhuntw...@lightcubesolutions.com wrote:
On 4/23/12 4:33 PM, Matt Burgess wrote:
The fix for this is to add
--with-native-system-header-dir=/tools/include to GCC's pass1 and pass2
builds so that it doesn't look at /usr/include at all.
On Wed, 18 Apr 2012 02:41:35 +0100
Fernando de Oliveira fam...@yahoo.com.br wrote:
...
/usr/bin/install -c -m 644
./Documentation/webkitgtk/html/WebKitWebWindowFeatur
es.html
GENinstall-data-local
Running gtkdoc-rebase
Rebasing WebKit1 documentation...
Traceback (most
On Sat, 07 Apr 2012 18:15:11 +0100
Эмиль Кранц bl8r1...@tut.by wrote:
Hello all.
Ncurses configure script during the Temp tools stage (chapter 5.15)
gives an error, requesting to be complied against gpm. As gpm is
installed in BLFS, the key --without-gpm should be passed to the
configure
On Thu, 29 Mar 2012 09:01:51 +0100
Cyril LEVIS cy...@levis-heb.net wrote:
Hi,
I think the test script in part vii should check for ed binary. It is
not installed by default on a debian-testing-amd64-netinst for example
(like my previous gawk and bison)
Just out of intrest, why should we
On Fri, 23 Mar 2012 08:46:11 +
thierr...@hispeed.ch wrote:
This was necessary otherwise make install was trying to creating the
directory /var/db (for nss) So after checking various Makefile and as a
probably temporary solution I specifiy
make install_root=/tools install
Another
On Thu, 22 Mar 2012 21:56:23 +
Bruce Dubbs bruce.du...@gmail.com wrote:
It looks like glibc-2.15 is about to be released:
http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/glibc/glibc-2.15.tar.xz is in the repository but
I can't find a release announcement yet.
Patch to use glibc-2.15
Andy
glibc-2.15.patch
Hello,
A recent change in glibc has broken compiling gcc on i686
http://sources.redhat.com/git/gitweb.cgi?p=glibc.git;a=commitdiff;h=4efeffc1d583597e4f52985b9747269e47b754e2
The solution is to change struct siginfo to siginfo_t
sed -i 's#struct siginfo #siginfo_t #' libgcc/config/*/linux-unwind.h
Hello
a simple patch to use gcc-4.7 in the book.
Andy
gcc.patch
Description: Binary data
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
On Fri, 16 Mar 2012 23:25:32 +
Thierry Nuttens thierr...@hispeed.ch wrote:
Hello
As every year, I'm giving a try to the next coming version of gcc 4.7.0 which
should be release very soon. Unfortunately, the pass2 of gcc has making some
problems because of (I guess) the sed which
On Thu, 15 Mar 2012 02:05:49 +
Jeremy Huntwork jhuntw...@lightcubesolutions.com wrote:
Has anyone else had a chance to try out the build fully and compare? I'm
waiting to hear more of a consensus from others who have tested it
before I drop this in, although I'm confident it's sound.
It
Hello
FYI, it seems that timezone/zoneinfo data are no longer installed by
glibc (from git). It still installs zic, and the files are still in the
source tree so you can use zic to generate /etc/localtime, however,
more up to date files are available at http://www.iana.org/time-zones
Andy
--
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 11:47:24 +
Matthew Burgess matt...@linuxfromscratch.org wrote:
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 11:24:27 +, Andrew Benton a...@benton.eu.com wrote:
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 09:47:18 +
Matthew Burgess matt...@linuxfromscratch.org wrote:
I'd like to get to the bottom
On Tue, 13 Mar 2012 15:19:19 +
Andrew Benton a...@benton.eu.com wrote:
checking dynamic linker characteristics... configure: error: Link tests are
not allowed after GCC_NO_EXECUTABLES.
make[2]: *** [configure-target-zlib] Error 1
make[2]: Leaving directory `/tmp/sources/gcc-build'
make
On Tue, 13 Mar 2012 17:02:47 +
Jeremy Huntwork jhuntw...@lightcubesolutions.com wrote:
Here's my log:
http://linuxfromscratch.org/~jhuntwork/033-gcc-pass1
And the script that generated it:
http://linuxfromscratch.org/~jhuntwork/033-gcc-pass1.sh
Here are mine:
On Tue, 13 Mar 2012 17:02:47 +
Jeremy Huntwork jhuntw...@lightcubesolutions.com wrote:
Here's my log:
http://linuxfromscratch.org/~jhuntwork/033-gcc-pass1
And the script that generated it:
http://linuxfromscratch.org/~jhuntwork/033-gcc-pass1.sh
For me, the build fails whilst it's
On Tue, 13 Mar 2012 17:40:03 +
Bruce Dubbs bruce.du...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm having a problem with why this is happening.
Me too...
The jhalfs vanilla LFS
svn build worked perfectly for me.
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~bdubbs/033-gcc-pass1
Looking at your log I see:
*** This
On Tue, 13 Mar 2012 22:06:33 +
Jeremy Huntwork jhuntw...@lightcubesolutions.com wrote:
What's your CPU?
andy@eccles:~$ cat /proc/cpuinfo
processor : 0
vendor_id : GenuineIntel
cpu family : 6
model : 30
model name : Intel(R) Core(TM) i5 CPU 760 @
On Tue, 13 Mar 2012 22:37:30 +
Gilles Espinasse g@free.fr wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Andrew Benton a...@benton.eu.com
To: lfs-dev@linuxfromscratch.org
Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2012 11:00 PM
Subject: Re: [lfs-dev] gcc cross patch in pass1
On Tue, 13 Mar 2012 17
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 00:31:41 +
Jeremy Huntwork jhuntw...@lightcubesolutions.com wrote:
On Fri, 2012-03-02 at 00:39 +, Andrew Benton wrote:
I'm still no nearer to figuring out why I get this error. Trying to
follow Jeremy's new newlib build method fails for me at the first pass
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 00:19:46 +
Matt Burgess matt...@linuxfromscratch.org wrote:
OK, the paragraph above your output stated that it fails for me at the
first pass of gcc, hence why I tested against the first pass of GCC.
That said, I *now* notice that paragraph also states your results are
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 09:47:18 +
Matthew Burgess matt...@linuxfromscratch.org wrote:
I must admit to being really confused by your need for these workarounds.
Me too. It makes me feel stupid.
Is this from your Fedora 16 Live CD? I'm building from a Fedora 16 host
with all updates from
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 11:47:16 +
Jeremy Huntwork jhuntw...@lightcubesolutions.com wrote:
Yes, when you are cross compiling you (typically) can't bootstrap, so
they disable the bootstrap if it's determined you are building a cross
compiler. So where we would normally need the
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 13:47:51 +
Pierre Labastie pierre.labas...@neuf.fr wrote:
OK, sorry,
I use --disable-target-zlib. Anyway : any library will be supposed to
run on the target,
so be compiled with xgcc. As an exception, I think libiberty, if not
disabled, is compiled
twice: once to
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 11:47:21 +
Jeremy Huntwork jhuntw...@lightcubesolutions.com wrote:
On 3/12/12 7:24 AM, Andrew Benton wrote:
I mainly use my current LFS install, I get the same errors if I use a
Fedora or Ubuntu live CD.
Which version specifically? If I get a chance, I'll download
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 09:47:18 +
Matthew Burgess matt...@linuxfromscratch.org wrote:
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 09:36:15 +, Andrew Benton a...@benton.eu.com wrote:
The book fails for me installing glibc, I
have to add libc_cv_ctors_header=yes to glibc's configure options. But
you knew
On Mon, 12 Mar 2012 18:17:54 +
Pierre Labastie pierre.labas...@neuf.fr wrote:
I've run binutils/gcc-pass1 following Jeremy's patch, with gcc-4.6.3,
so without --disable-target-*.
It compiles. zlib is compiled in the gcc-build/zlib directory, with the
host toolchain, then linked to gcc
Hello,
I've just changed to shadow-4.1.5 and it's caused me a problem. When I
launch Xorg I do it with a bootscript like this:
user=andy
su - ${user} -c xinit /etc/X11/xinitrc ~/.x-session-errors
With shadow-4.1.4.3 it worked fine but with shadow-4.1.5 I get an error:
su: Cannot drop the
On Sun, 11 Mar 2012 23:54:44 +
Matt Burgess matt...@linuxfromscratch.org wrote:
On Fri, 2012-03-02 at 00:39 +, Andrew Benton wrote:
On Sat, 25 Feb 2012 19:40:49 +
Matt Burgess matt...@linuxfromscratch.org wrote:
Andy hit issues that were discussed in the thread starting
On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 17:36:08 -0600
Bruce Dubbs bruce.du...@gmail.com wrote:
So it is. Do you want me to change them or do you want to do it?
I'll do it
Andy
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above
On Sat, 03 Mar 2012 18:37:20 -0500
Jeremy Huntwork jhuntw...@lightcubesolutions.com wrote:
The patch is good to have as a workaround, but I'd like to find out what
the issue is that's causing this. I fear it's either a problem with your
host's compiler or a bug in the GCC build system. Check
On Mon, 5 Mar 2012 15:41:17 +0100
Ragnar Thomsen ragnarthom...@hotmail.com wrote:
I would like to add the wicd package to BLFS.
For those of you who do not know it, it is a network connection manager,
similar to NetworkManager but not as feature rich, and written in python.
It can
On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 10:33:46 -0600
Bruce Dubbs bruce.du...@gmail.com wrote:
Ken Moffat wrote:
Until you physically removed some
things this weekend, my impression was that the xml for old packages
always remained in the book, but the packages were commented in
general.ent and in
On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 13:57:01 -0500
Jeremy Huntwork jhuntw...@lightcubesolutions.com wrote:
Yeah, as I've read more about it it seems like the culprit may be
libtool, so effectively gcc's build system. What the exact trigger is
that makes it different on various systems still isn't clear.
On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 21:06:11 +
Matt Burgess matt...@linuxfromscratch.org wrote:
Hi,
I'm tackling #3002 (upgrading Util-Linux to 2.21). Bruce suggested the
use of '--enable-new-mount' so that we will use the new libmount based
version of 'mount'. It's marked as EXPERIMENTAL in
On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 16:00:38 -0600
Bruce Dubbs bruce.du...@gmail.com wrote:
My proposal is to just skip 'arch' completely as I do not believe it is
not used anywhere in LFS/BLFS.
It is used in several places in BLFS (eg the pages for Liba52, nss and
nspr), but I'm sure uname -m will work just
On Wed, 29 Feb 2012 20:33:49 -0800
Qrux qrux@gmail.com wrote:
Back to the unanswered question (2): Andrew, does your machine (pure-64
build) have the LFS-7.0-release toolchain,
It's more like current LFS svn, there are few packages that are not up
to date in my scripts but not many. With
On Wed, 29 Feb 2012 21:04:33 -0600
Bruce Dubbs bruce.du...@gmail.com wrote:
Also, util-linux plans to add GPT support into fdisk in version 2.22.
That's probably six months away.
Thanks, that's good news.
Andy
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ:
On Thu, 1 Mar 2012 08:43:05 -0800
Qrux qrux@gmail.com wrote:
[~/lfs/src/openssl-1.0.0e] # grep ENGINESDIR $(find . -name *.c -o -name
*.h)
./crypto/engine/eng_list.c: if((load_dir =
getenv(OPENSSL_ENGINES)) == 0) load_dir = ENGINESDIR;
./crypto/opensslconf.h:#define
On Sat, 25 Feb 2012 19:40:49 +
Matt Burgess matt...@linuxfromscratch.org wrote:
Andy hit issues that were discussed in the thread starting at
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/pipermail/lfs-dev/2011-March/064617.html
When I have a bit more time, I'll try to build again without the patch,
On Tue, 28 Feb 2012 17:02:59 -0800
Qrux qrux@gmail.com wrote:
I don't think anyone referred to precomp bins. I presume all discussions
here are about source builds.
1) Which BLFS version?
Current.
2) Are you on a 64-bit only platform?
My 64 bit systems are pure x86_64 with
On Wed, 29 Feb 2012 04:27:17 -0800
Qrux qrux@gmail.com wrote:
On Feb 29, 2012, at 3:59 AM, Andrew Benton wrote:
On Tue, 28 Feb 2012 17:02:59 -0800
Qrux qrux@gmail.com wrote:
I don't think anyone referred to precomp bins. I presume all discussions
here are about source
On Mon, 27 Feb 2012 22:49:07 -0500
Jeremy Huntwork jhuntw...@lightcubesolutions.com wrote:
Please review and test the actual changes. I'd like to commit this to
trunk, but I want to hear opinions first. The rendered book is here:
http://linuxfromscratch.org/~jhuntwork/sysroot/
And a full
On Mon, 27 Feb 2012 20:10:28 -0800
Bryan Kadzban br...@kadzban.is-a-geek.net wrote:
Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
5. Since we don't support multilib, remove all toolchain uses of
lib64. No need for those symlinks any more. Everything goes to lib.
I don't think this is a good idea.
The 64-bit
On Tue, 28 Feb 2012 15:15:27 -0800
Qrux qrux@gmail.com wrote:
As for the 64-bit works in practice...BIND is an example of a downstream
app that seems to want to look in /lib64. Whether it's looking for
ld64.so.1, ld-linux-x86-64.so.2, or something else even, I can't say. I do
know
On Mon, 27 Feb 2012 11:43:11 -0600
Bruce Dubbs bruce.du...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm going to remove it from my working copy of the book and make a test
run to see if not having it runs into any problems.
I do want to leave it in for 7.1 just because its a minor issue and we
don't have enough
Hello,
I notice that on the BLFS pages for dash and zsh we add them
to /etc/shells so that people can change their shell with chsh
(installed as part of shadow).
However, grepping through LFS for /etc/shells finds
nothing. /etc/shells is not needed until we install shadow so
perhaps we could echo
On Tue, 21 Feb 2012 09:47:00 +0100
Pierre Labastie pierre.labas...@neuf.fr wrote:
Hi,
I have done a test of LFS-7.1-rc1. ICA went OK, except the
already reported problem with ld.so.cache (ldconfig still missing
somewhere), which is not a big issue. In case somebody else
does ICA, there is
On Fri, 17 Feb 2012 19:50:51 +0200
Thanos Baloukas baloukast...@sch.gr wrote:
Hello everybody
I just subscribed on this list. I hope I can help.
The book states python-2.7.2 as required dependency. I'm not sure if the
INSTALL source tree's file is up to date, but it says nothing about
On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 12:46:24 +0100
Pierre Labastie pierre.labas...@neuf.fr wrote:
Maybe try (supposing the build tree has not been removed):
echo '#includecstdio' |/mnt/lfs/sources/gcc-build/gcc/xgcc -shared-libgcc
\
-B/mnt/lfs/sources/gcc-build/gcc -nostdinc++ \
On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 23:01:30 +0100
Pierre Labastie pierre.labas...@neuf.fr wrote:
If I understand the xxx.la files, they are used by libtool to find
libraries. I am certainly missing something, but I do not understand
why changing tools to usr in libstdc++.la would give a better
result. When
On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 11:56:55 -0800
Bryan Kadzban br...@kadzban.is-a-geek.net wrote:
Looks like Uli broke it again:
http://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=commitdiff;h=c3a87236702cb73be1dada3438bbd3c3934e83f8
If you remove that defined __USE_GNU off the end of the #if line, I
bet it'll
On Fri, 03 Feb 2012 21:44:34 -0800
Bryan Kadzban br...@kadzban.is-a-geek.net wrote:
Andrew Benton wrote:
But according to that bugzilla page, the bug was fixed weeks ago? The
'fix' is definitely in the glibc source so it would appear that it's
not working.
I assume that by this you mean
On Sat, 04 Feb 2012 09:49:37 -0800
Bryan Kadzban br...@kadzban.is-a-geek.net wrote:
Andrew Benton wrote:
On Fri, 03 Feb 2012 21:44:34 -0800 Bryan Kadzban
br...@kadzban.is-a-geek.net wrote:
Do you get __USE_ISOC11 #define'd (to what value?) or #undef'ed?
What about __cplusplus (again
Hello,
I've tried to build LFS with current glibc from git (well, current as
of yesterday) and the second pass of gcc (the first one after
installing glibc into /tools) failed like this:
Making all in libsupc++
make[4]: Entering directory
On Sat, 28 Jan 2012 13:28:19 +0100
Pierre Labastie pierre.labas...@neuf.fr wrote:
Hi,
Maybe another thing to worry about:
--
--- iteration-1/usr/lib/libgmpxx.la
+++ iteration-2/usr/lib/libgmpxx.la
@@ -17,7 +17,7 @@
inherited_linker_flags=''
On Wed, 18 Jan 2012 22:47:36 +
Ken Moffat zarniwh...@ntlworld.com wrote:
I've no useful comments on the rest of this, but isn't reiser4 more
or less defunct at the moment? Btrfs seems to be where development
that will get into the kernel seems to be happening, although I'm
not sure it's
Hello,
When I'm booting with udev-177 I get a cryptic message output to the
screen in amongst the bootscripts that reads: udevd[120]: No such file
or directory
Is anyone else seeing this? I suspect it may be due to kmod looking for
something that is not present in a monolithic kernel. When I run
On Sat, 14 Jan 2012 01:22:45 -0800
Zachary Kotlarek z...@kotlarek.com wrote:
But yes, if you want to do a modules-only build you do need to rebuild the
initramfs when you change kernels. Or at least the /lib/modules bit of it. My
point was just that, since the current direct-boot method is
On Thu, 12 Jan 2012 15:32:49 -0600
Bruce Dubbs bruce.du...@gmail.com wrote:
udev is dropping support of module-init-tools for a new package called
kmod.
It seems that kmod is required for udev-177:
checking for KMOD... no
configure: error: Package requirements (libkmod = 3) were not met:
No
On Thu, 12 Jan 2012 15:32:49 -0600
Bruce Dubbs bruce.du...@gmail.com wrote:
There appears appears to be a movement to consolidate /bin and /usr/bin,
/lib and /usr/lib, and /sbin and /usr/sbin.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/UsrMove
I like this. I've started doing it on my systems.
On Mon, 09 Jan 2012 21:23:59 -0600
Bruce Dubbs bruce.du...@gmail.com wrote:
Just a reminder that we did at one time adopt a patch naming convention:
pkgname dash version dash short underscore descriptive underscore name
dash patchrev3.patch
That is, the name should be:
On Mon, 09 Jan 2012 17:07:42 -0600
Bruce Dubbs bruce.du...@gmail.com wrote:
Be careful. There are a lot of packages that need libpng. At least
qt3, firefox, seamonkey, thunderbird, and gimp have patches for libpng-1.5.
Since it's only a point release, they are probably OK, but they should
On Tue, 10 Jan 2012 17:15:19 +0100
Olaf mailingli...@ban-solms.de wrote:
FWIW: libnl-3.2.3 proved quite an interesting 'change', I've needed to
tweak several packages (hostapd to name one) to deal with the move of
header files :-(
Could you tell me how you built hostapd with libnl-3.2.3?
On Sat, 07 Jan 2012 20:31:31 -0500
Walter Webb ng...@earthlink.net wrote:
The blfs book for 2012-01-03 (I also checked 2012-01-07) has a patch
for firefox-9.0.1. The compile failed with the patch, and succeeded
without the patch. In the patch itself it says:
Description: Fixes compiling
On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 23:20:09 -0600
Bruce Dubbs bruce.du...@gmail.com wrote:
I think the arch command is a bit more than uname -m. See
http://www.manpagez.com/man/1/arch/
That link is to the BSD man page. It may be a bit more than uname -m on
BSD but for us the version we currently install
Hello,
From the trivial detail department; we configure util-linux
with --enable-arch, however, on the man page for arch I see:
DESCRIPTION
arch is a deprecated command since util-linux 2.13. Use uname -m or
use arch from the GNU coreutils package.
Coreutils can install arch
On Thu, 29 Dec 2011 15:56:39 -0600
Bruce Dubbs bruce.du...@gmail.com wrote:
I think that idea is fine, but wonder about the use of awk. It may not
be available.
The book requires awk.
Andy
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
On Sat, 26 Nov 2011 21:27:32 -0600
DJ Lucas d...@linuxfromscratch.org wrote:
Should probably add --without-git to the chapter 5
gettext configure flags. Though I did not have any trouble with git, it
will not be available in the chroot environment, but is picked up by
default.
Gettext
Hello,
Just a heads up, it seems that udev-175 installs udevd into
--libexecdir, ie /usr/lib/udev/udevd and not /sbin/udevd
Andy
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
On Sat, 12 Nov 2011 19:39:04 -0600
Bruce Dubbs bruce.du...@gmail.com wrote:
Ugh. Is there a mailing list for udev so I can ask about tarballs?
Google doesn't seem to help.
I've made a tarball
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~andy/udev-175.tar.xz
Andy
--
On Fri, 14 Oct 2011 08:42:47 +0700
pham.the.chung0 pham.the.chu...@gmail.com wrote:
Dear all,
I have just do make menuconfig with kernel linux-3.0.1.That kernel seem has
a problem
it doent have wireless or wiremax driver.I must ask these problem because if
you have same problem just share
Good news everyone!
shadow-4.1.4.2 works, it can (at least with PAM, I've not tried
without) successfully limit the number of processes.
Andy
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Sorry for the noise. My fault. Shadow-4.1.4.3 is working normally.
I've been using slim http://slim.berlios.de/ as a login manager run
from a bootscript run by init and it seems that it is not setting the
limits. If I login at the command prompt shadow sets the limits. The
reason I thought
Hello,
I originally sent this to LFS support by mistake; I shouldn't send
emails late at night ;)
I've wrote to LFS support before about fork bombs. Last July I learned
how to prevent them by limiting the number of processes a user can have
with /etc/limits. Recently I've been working on
1 - 100 of 333 matches
Mail list logo
