Re: [lfs-dev] Final call for changes before LFS/BLFS 10.1 release

On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 11:37:25AM +0800, Kevin Buckley via lfs-dev wrote: > > I am aware that LFS expects the user to have all the sources unpacked, > somewhere, and doesn't provide explict instructions for doing so, nor for > changing into the package's source directory, at the package level, bu

Re: [lfs-dev] High cpu usage for Xorg in xfce. Solved.

On Sat, Feb 27, 2021 at 02:15:48AM +, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > I mostly only use xfce on my laptop, but before upgrading that I > want to feel that the new build will be worthwhile. The laptop is a > zen1+ so I mostly test full xfce on a desktop zen1+ with 8 CPUs > (te

[lfs-dev] High cpu usage for Xorg in xfce.

I mostly only use xfce on my laptop, but before upgrading that I want to feel that the new build will be worthwhile. The laptop is a zen1+ so I mostly test full xfce on a desktop zen1+ with 8 CPUs (technically, 4 + multi threading) which is similar to what is on the laptop, except faster and with

Re: [lfs-dev] Promote JS78.8.0 for 10.1 ?

On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 02:55:50PM -0600, Douglas R. Reno via lfs-dev wrote: > > On 2/24/21 12:13 PM, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 03:48:05AM +, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > > > On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 04:31:12AM +0100, Pierre Labastie via

Re: [lfs-dev] Promote JS78.8.0 for 10.1 ?

On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 03:48:05AM +, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 04:31:12AM +0100, Pierre Labastie via lfs-dev wrote: > > On Wed, 2021-02-24 at 02:02 +0000, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > > > I see that people have been busy tagging thing

Re: [lfs-dev] Promote JS78.8.0 for 10.1 ?

On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 04:31:12AM +0100, Pierre Labastie via lfs-dev wrote: > On Wed, 2021-02-24 at 02:02 +0000, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > > I see that people have been busy tagging things whilst I've been > > offline.  One of those things is JS-78.8.0. > > >

[lfs-dev] Promote JS78.8.0 for 10.1 ?

I see that people have been busy tagging things whilst I've been offline. One of those things is JS-78.8.0. Technically, the JS build does not appear to contain any security fixes, just one or two lines of python got changed. But firefox-78.8.0 does contain the usual crop of fixes rated as 'high

Re: [lfs-dev] Regression in top ?

On Tue, Feb 23, 2021 at 02:30:38AM +, Ken Moffat wrote: > Finally got a 10.1-rc1+ system booted. But lookign at 'top' on this > 8-thread machine it only shows the even-numbered cores (Cpu0 .. 2 .. > 4 .. 6). This is plain wierd, is it a regression in > procps-ng-3.3.17 ? > > I so, I guess I'

[lfs-dev] Regression in top ?

Finally got a 10.1-rc1+ system booted. But lookign at 'top' on this 8-thread machine it only shows the even-numbered cores (Cpu0 .. 2 .. 4 .. 6). This is plain wierd, is it a regression in procps-ng-3.3.17 ? I so, I guess I'll have to revert to 3.3.16. ĸen -- When someone told

[lfs-dev] Lots of segfaults in libc-2.33.so.orig

I built current -dev a couple of days ago, and it seems to be running ok, so I gave linux-5.10.17-rc1 a try (this is a desktop with the orc unwinder, I initially built it with patched 5.10.13 adding the fix Pierre identified). Now that 5.10.17-rc1 is running, I took a look at dmesg and was shocked

[lfs-dev] Security Advisories

The new pages of Security Advisories are now live. To see the LFS advisories, go to http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/read.html and follow the links in the Current Stable paragraphs (svn, systemd). For editors, the advisories are common to svn and systemd and are in the www repo, at lfs/advisor

Re: [lfs-dev] Possible binutils-2.36 problems

On Fri, Feb 05, 2021 at 10:39:08AM -0600, Bruce Dubbs via lfs-dev wrote: > On 2/5/21 6:48 AM, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > > While replying to Frans on -support re his inability to build > > glibc-2.33, I glanced at the binutils bugs > > https://www.mail-archive.com/bug-

[lfs-dev] Possible binutils-2.36 problems

While replying to Frans on -support re his inability to build glibc-2.33, I glanced at the binutils bugs https://www.mail-archive.com/bug-binutils@gnu.org/ and said that 2.36 might be buggy. At that time I hadn't read all the links gurgle found for me. One of them is https://www.linuxquestions.or

Re: [lfs-dev] sudo : CVE CVE-2021-3156

On Wed, Feb 03, 2021 at 10:13:26AM -0800, Tree Davies via lfs-dev wrote: > Hi Everyone, > > Just wanted to mention according to the article BLFS is using a vulnerable > version of Sudo (1.9.2). > Although I haven't been able to repro it... Has anyone else been successful? > > Cheers, > Tree > Hi

Re: [lfs-dev] cbindgen-0.16.0 and mozilla

On Sun, Dec 27, 2020 at 07:18:33PM +, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > On Sun, Dec 27, 2020 at 07:28:33PM +0100, gabriele balducci via lfs-dev wrote: > > hi > > > > > I'm running into a problem with cbindgen-0.16.0 first identified by > > > renodr. Bo

Re: [lfs-dev] cbindgen-0.16.0 and mozilla

On Sun, Dec 27, 2020 at 07:28:33PM +0100, gabriele balducci via lfs-dev wrote: > hi > > > I'm running into a problem with cbindgen-0.16.0 first identified by > > renodr. Both Thunderbird and Firefox fail in the same way. > > if this can be of interest to you: at least for FF, the working version

[lfs-dev] Odd new gdbmtool test failure.

I'm currently building svn-20201223 sysv, the only 'variance' is that the host is running a 5.10.1 kernel and in this build I'm using 5.10.2 headers. I very much doubt that those are relevant. We have not changed either gdbm or expect for a very long time, and my last build (r12061 with a 5.9.8 k

[lfs-dev] Test failure in procps-ng

Building current svn, I've now had a test failure in procps-ng: Running ./pmap.test/pmap.exp ... FAIL: pmap X with unreachable process This initially surprised me because neither the package version nor my script have changed recently. I was half awake - first, I didn't realise it had run the te

Re: [lfs-dev] eudev pkgconfig file

On Mon, Nov 16, 2020 at 04:43:14PM +, Roger via lfs-dev wrote: > eudev puts udev.pc in /usr/share/pkgconfig; all other packages > use /usr/lib/pkgconfig. > On a completed BLFS desktop system, you can have a lot more in /usr/share/pkgconfig. The are supposed to be architecture-independent fil

Re: [lfs-dev] Problems with scour

On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 09:01:16PM +0100, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > Why are python packages so painful ? > Sorry, wrong list. I've forwarded it to blfs-dev. -- The people next door oppress me all night long. I tell them: I work all day, a man's got to have some time to l

[lfs-dev] Problems with scour

Why are python packages so painful ? With scour-0.38.1, when I download it using firefox I get scour-038.1.tar.gz instead of -0.38.1. If I use wget it correctly provides -0.38.1. That is the reverse of the more common behaviour. More annoyingly, since May I've only been building scour for pytho

Re: [lfs-dev] LFS source md5sums

On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 10:40:06AM -0500, Bruce Dubbs via lfs-dev wrote: > On 9/28/20 10:13 AM, John Burrell via lfs-dev wrote: > > I downloaded the SYSTEMD book and got the wget-list and md5sums files with: > > > > make -j1 -f ${REPODIR}/Makefile -C $REPODIR BASEDIR=$SourceDir > > ${SourceDir}/wg

[lfs-dev] Refcount bug in 5.7 and 5.8 kernels

Pasting from oss-security, where Andy Lutomirski said that a CVE has been requested. Fixed in 5.8.7 (presumably also fixed in latest 5.7, but why would you be running that ?) | Linux 5.7 and 5.8 have a bug in the reference counting of the struct | page that backs the vsyscall page. The result is

[lfs-dev] Comments on the expected test results in the book

I've now run the full set of tests on three different builds of 10.1-rc1, and I'm almost in agreement about the expected results. Two builds were on ryzen. Those used -O3 throughout, even in gcc where I had stopped doing that because of failures I described as in the torture tests. Reinstated be

Re: [lfs-dev] Perl privlib is putting core modules in /usr/share

On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 11:40:34PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs via lfs-dev wrote: > On 8/13/20 11:32 PM, Kevin Buckley wrote: > > On Fri, 14 Aug 2020 at 11:48, Bruce Dubbs via lfs-dev > > wrote: > > > > > > > > I might have missed this in the email thread but why does the change, > > > > which I've seen a

Re: [lfs-dev] Perl privlib is putting core modules in /usr/share

On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 11:29:14AM +0800, Kevin Buckley via lfs-dev wrote: > > The thread explains why the addition of the "perl-version-min" > subdirectory is required. but why the hard-coding of 5.32 > when that's what the entity value would be expanded to, > given what's in packages.ent, vis: >

Re: [lfs-dev] libcap-2.42 No rule to make target 'install-static'

On Tue, Aug 11, 2020 at 06:20:16AM +0200, Pierre Labastie via lfs-dev wrote: > On Tue, 2020-08-11 at 05:09 +0100, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > > Trying to build current svn, libcap install failed: > > > > make -C libcap install > > make[1]: *** No rule to make targ

[lfs-dev] libcap-2.42 No rule to make target 'install-static'

Trying to build current svn, libcap install failed: make -C libcap install make[1]: *** No rule to make target 'install-static', needed by 'install'. Stop. make[1]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs make[1]: Entering directory '/building/libcap-2.42/libcap' mkdir -p -m 0755 /usr/include/sys in

Re: [lfs-dev] Need help LFS 7.10 binutils failed in pass 2

On Sat, Aug 08, 2020 at 11:06:35AM +0530, Vijayakumar Athithan via lfs-dev wrote: > Dear Ken, > > Thanks for your time and reply. > > I tried this in Ubuntu VM. Please find details below on Ubuntu VM > uname -a Linux ubuntu 4.15.0-112-generic #113~16.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jul > 10 04:37:08 > > U

Re: [lfs-dev] Need help LFS 7.10 binutils failed in pass 2

On Fri, Aug 07, 2020 at 09:39:14PM +0530, Vijayakumar Athithan via lfs-dev wrote: > I have been working on resolving issues in build scripts that were built > based on LFS a few years > LFS has changed a LOT over the years, and for the next release (10.0) it will change even more (see current ve

Re: [lfs-dev] Perl privlib is putting core modules in /usr/share

On Thu, Aug 06, 2020 at 04:22:33AM +0100, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > On Thu, Aug 06, 2020 at 10:31:52AM +0800, Xi Ruoyao via lfs-dev wrote: > > On 2020-08-05 22:03 +0100, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > > > On Thu, Aug 06, 2020 at 03:57:29AM +0800, Xi Ruoyao via lfs-dev wrot

Re: [lfs-dev] Perl privlib is putting core modules in /usr/share

On Thu, Aug 06, 2020 at 03:48:45AM +0100, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > On Wed, Aug 05, 2020 at 10:03:52PM +0100, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > > But by changing sitelib to > -Dsitearch=/usr/lib/perl5/5.32/site_perl > I have ended up with plain perl modules in /usr/lib/prel5/5

Re: [lfs-dev] Perl privlib is putting core modules in /usr/share

On Thu, Aug 06, 2020 at 10:31:52AM +0800, Xi Ruoyao via lfs-dev wrote: > On 2020-08-05 22:03 +0100, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 06, 2020 at 03:57:29AM +0800, Xi Ruoyao via lfs-dev wrote: > > > On 2020-08-05 19:53 +0100, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > &g

Re: [lfs-dev] Perl privlib is putting core modules in /usr/share

On Wed, Aug 05, 2020 at 10:03:52PM +0100, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > On Thu, Aug 06, 2020 at 03:57:29AM +0800, Xi Ruoyao via lfs-dev wrote: > > On 2020-08-05 19:53 +0100, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > > > > > > But until now we have managed without putting pure

Re: [lfs-dev] perl install options

On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 03:49:07PM +0100, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 07:05:24AM -0700, Joel Bion via lfs-dev wrote: > > Upgrading Perl was the trigger for me building my own package dependency > > tracker utility. With tons of manual configuratio

Re: [lfs-dev] Perl privlib is putting core modules in /usr/share

On Wed, Aug 05, 2020 at 10:03:52PM +0100, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > > The possibility that anything other than vendor modules (i.e. from > third parties) would end up in /usr/share was not apparent. > In fact, Git.pm IS installed in /usr/share/perl5/ rather than e.g. /usr

Re: [lfs-dev] Perl privlib is putting core modules in /usr/share

On Thu, Aug 06, 2020 at 03:57:29AM +0800, Xi Ruoyao via lfs-dev wrote: > On 2020-08-05 19:53 +0100, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > > (I've changed the subject and cut down some of hte obsolete detail) > > > > On Wed, Aug 05, 2020 at 04:22:49AM +0100, Ke

[lfs-dev] Perl privlib is putting core modules in /usr/share

(I've changed the subject and cut down some of hte obsolete detail) On Wed, Aug 05, 2020 at 04:22:49AM +0100, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > O Wed, Aug 05, 2020 at 01:54:44AM +0100, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > > I'm looking at perl module dependencies, and I can see a re

Re: [lfs-dev] Perl-5.32.0 : Has Test::More disappeared ?

O Wed, Aug 05, 2020 at 01:54:44AM +0100, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > I'm looking at perl module dependencies, and I can see a reference > to Test::More in a test, although I'm not sure if that test actually > gets run. The reason I'm askng is that this used to be a cor

[lfs-dev] Perl-5.32.0 : Has Test::More disappeared ?

I'm looking at perl module dependencies, and I can see a reference to Test::More in a test, although I'm not sure if that test actually gets run. The reason I'm askng is that this used to be a core module, but I cannot see it in my 5.32.0 builds, althought the man page for Test::More.3 is still in

Re: [lfs-dev] grub with uefi for LFS 10?

On Sun, Aug 02, 2020 at 10:07:23PM +0200, Alexey Orishko via lfs-dev wrote: > On Sun, Aug 2, 2020 at 6:46 PM Xi Ruoyao via lfs-dev > wrote: > > > > Since majority of new laptops have EFI, it would really help to have > > The readers who don't need EFI will be annoyed. meson/ninja already > > a

Re: [lfs-dev] report: test build with glibc-development, and old updated packages

On Sun, Aug 02, 2020 at 10:10:03PM +0200, Pierre Labastie via lfs-dev wrote: > I've done a test build with git version of glibc, and all other > packages updated. I've forgotten the beta version of autoconf. I thought I was out on a limb with autoconf ;-) So far, apart from automake tests it look

Re: [lfs-dev] Tcl failed soem tests

On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 08:15:10PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs via lfs-dev wrote: > On 7/30/20 6:22 PM, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > > On my experimental build which is currently in progress, I managed > > to log the results of tcl's tests. At first I thought the tests had > >

Re: [lfs-dev] More observations on directory creations

On Sat, Aug 01, 2020 at 04:20:54PM +0200, Pierre Labastie via lfs-dev wrote: > > > > > Hoping there's something there for someone, > > Sure! At least for me (and Thomas) > > Pierre > +1 ĸen -- Juliet's version of cleanliness was next to godliness, which was to say it was erratic, past all un

Re: [lfs-dev] grub with uefi for LFS 10?

On Sat, Aug 01, 2020 at 03:10:54PM -0500, Timothy Russo via lfs-dev wrote: > With efi being more the standard now, I'd like to ask if we could default > grub to supporting uefi instead of having to use the uefi hint. > > Or at last maybe formalize it and make it an option, where you can pick > bio

[lfs-dev] rustc in BLFS-10.0 : stick with 1.42.0 :-(

People may have noticed that I was hoping to propose that we update rustc to 1.45.0 for our 10.0 release. I've now dropped that hope. For 1.45.0 my thinking was: i) it's current. ii) it might stop us having to upgrade for a while (from current packages, librsvg will be what probaby forces that)

Re: [lfs-dev] Tcl failed soem tests

On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 08:15:10PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs via lfs-dev wrote: > On 7/30/20 6:22 PM, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > > What I really think you need to do is do a full build without CFLAGS or > CXXFLAGS set. Then compare with a build with those settings. > You really

[lfs-dev] Tcl failed soem tests

On my experimental build which is currently in progress, I managed to log the results of tcl's tests. At first I thought the tests had died, but in the end they completed (2.9 SBU with make -j8, most of the time obviously spent on tests which failed). The results do not look wonderful: Tests end

[lfs-dev] Learning the new build system

I like the new build system, the mostly improved test results are very encouraging. But I suspect I've still got a lot to learn about how the combination of the new approach plus my own scripts can go wrong. I completed my normal build from last Saturday's books a day or so ago, and almost everyt

Re: [lfs-dev] Expected package changes for LFS-10.0 ?

On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 04:32:50PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs via lfs-dev wrote: > On 7/28/20 3:53 PM, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > > > I'll now mention that a new release of autoconf is being prepared. > > 2.69b (i.e. beta) came out a few days ago. Looking at gnu git, > &g

Re: [lfs-dev] Expected package changes for LFS-10.0 ?

On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 10:43:44PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs via lfs-dev wrote: > On 7/27/20 10:35 PM, Xi Ruoyao via lfs-dev wrote: > > On 2020-07-28 03:30 +0100, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > > > On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 09:05:32PM -0500, Douglas R. Reno via lfs-dev > > >

[lfs-dev] procps-ng: seds and rm for testsuite unnecessary

I think the following modifications to the procps-ng testsuite are unnecessary: sed -i -r 's|(pmap_initname)\\\$|\1|' testsuite/pmap.test/pmap.exp sed -i '/set tty/d' testsuite/pkill.test/pkill.exp rm testsuite/pgrep.test/pgrep.exp I dropped these a while ago, and now that I've completed a curren

Re: [lfs-dev] Expected package changes for LFS-10.0 ?

On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 09:05:32PM -0500, Douglas R. Reno via lfs-dev wrote: > > As far as I know, we have another binutils as well (2.35). I think there's a > new version of Check as well, the kernel, and util-linux. > Cheers. I'm on check-0.15.0 at the moment (haven't looked at any LFS testsui

Re: [lfs-dev] Expected package changes for LFS-10.0 ?

On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 09:00:55PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs via lfs-dev wrote: > On 7/27/20 8:45 PM, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > > I see that a newer gettext is now out, which probably allows > > bison-3.7.0 to build. Meanwhile, I'm hopeful that bison-3.7.1 will > >

[lfs-dev] Expected package changes for LFS-10.0 ?

I see that a newer gettext is now out, which probably allows bison-3.7.0 to build. Meanwhile, I'm hopeful that bison-3.7.1 will be out soon, with tests to detect whether it can use the functions added in 3.7 or must fall back to functions available in e.g. gettext-0.20.2. But meanwhile (and parti

[lfs-dev] Bison: The tests are known to fail using multiple processors.

Where tests for a past version have been known to fail using -jN, we tend to carry forward a warning. Perhaps it would be more useful to say 'have been known to fail'. For example, today I tested the bison dev version on a completed system, and was reminded how tlong that takes at -j1. So I retr

Re: [lfs-dev] perl install options

On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 02:42:03PM +0200, Thomas Trepl via lfs-dev wrote: > Hi all, > > this is about hte configuration options of perl. > > Problem: > whenever perl is upgraded to a newer version (for example 5.30.2 to > 5.30.3), all perl modules needs to be reinstalled as the current > configur

Re: [lfs-dev] perl install options

On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 10:13:19PM +0200, Thomas Trepl wrote: > Am Samstag, den 20.06.2020, 14:53 +0100 schrieb Ken Moffat via lfs- > dev: > > On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 02:42:03PM +0200, Thomas Trepl via lfs-dev wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > > > this is

Re: [lfs-dev] Some comments on the test results.

On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 07:46:54PM +0100, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 06:58:42PM +0200, Pierre Labastie via lfs-dev wrote: > > On Fri, 2020-06-19 at 16:26 +0100, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > > > I've now been through my test logs for

Re: [lfs-dev] perl install options

On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 07:05:24AM -0700, Joel Bion via lfs-dev wrote: > Upgrading Perl was the trigger for me building my own package dependency > tracker utility. With tons of manual configuration, I am able to upgrade any > subset of packages at one time. It tells me what I need to rebuild, in

Re: [lfs-dev] perl install options

On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 02:42:03PM +0200, Thomas Trepl via lfs-dev wrote: > Hi all, > > this is about hte configuration options of perl. > > Problem: > whenever perl is upgraded to a newer version (for example 5.30.2 to > 5.30.3), all perl modules needs to be reinstalled as the current > configur

Re: [lfs-dev] Some comments on the test results.

On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 01:14:01PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs via lfs-dev wrote: > On 6/19/20 11:58 AM, Pierre Labastie via lfs-dev wrote: > > On Fri, 2020-06-19 at 16:26 +0100, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > > > I've now been through my test logs for the new build

Re: [lfs-dev] Some comments on the test results.

On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 06:58:42PM +0200, Pierre Labastie via lfs-dev wrote: > On Fri, 2020-06-19 at 16:26 +0100, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > > I've now been through my test logs for the new build (on my i7 > > haswell). > > > > Here are a few comments (in

[lfs-dev] Some comments on the test results.

I've now been through my test logs for the new build (on my i7 haswell). Here are a few comments (in order of testing) glibc-2.31.0 We say "misc/tst-ttyname is known to fail in the LFS chroot environment." But for me it was skipped (I'm running a 5.7.2 kernel, with 5.7.2 headers an

Re: [lfs-dev] Stripping Again: loss of suid on some files

On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 03:48:07PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs via lfs-dev wrote: > On 6/17/20 3:36 PM, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > > > On this build, after misreading 'stripping' earlier in the book (and > > trashing the partial system by running it from within chroot)

Re: [lfs-dev] Stripping Again: loss of suid on some files

On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 09:46:16PM +0200, Pierre Labastie via lfs-dev wrote: > On Wed, 2020-06-17 at 19:55 +0100, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > > I just tried: > sudo strip /bin/su. > The size was reduced from 139512 to 41424 bytes, and it is still suid > afterwards. Not sur

Re: [lfs-dev] Stripping Again: loss of suid on some files

On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 02:19:41PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs via lfs-dev wrote: > On 6/17/20 1:55 PM, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > > Bringing this here now that Scott Andrews has pointed me towards the > > source of why users could not su on my new system: loss of suid. > > >

[lfs-dev] Stripping Again: loss of suid on some files

Bringing this here now that Scott Andrews has pointed me towards the source of why users could not su on my new system: loss of suid. In the past I have not usually run what was in 'Stripping Again' because my CFLAGS drop debug information. But I've now started to allow that in elfutils (to get t

Re: [lfs-dev] Future for LFS

On Mon, Jun 15, 2020 at 09:25:04PM +0900, Akira Urushibata via lfs-dev wrote: > On Sat, 13 Jun 2020 Pierre Labastie wrote: > > > the problem is not lfs, but blfs. There are around 750 packages in > > there. If those packages are all updated twice a year (some have > > much more frequent updates...

Re: [lfs-dev] Odd failure to make the book : sorted

On Sat, Jun 13, 2020 at 02:05:12AM +0100, Ken Moffat wrote: > On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 07:39:39PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs via lfs-dev wrote: > > On 6/12/20 7:14 PM, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > > > I've been updating my local copy of cross2, and creating that book, > > &

Re: [lfs-dev] Odd failure to make the book

On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 07:39:39PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs via lfs-dev wrote: > On 6/12/20 7:14 PM, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > > I've been updating my local copy of cross2, and creating that book, > > without noticing any obvious problems. But before I attempt to > > che

[lfs-dev] Odd failure to make the book

I've been updating my local copy of cross2, and creating that book, without noticing any obvious problems. But before I attempt to check my scripts agaisnt it I thought I'd better ensure that my copy of trunk (from which I update package versions etc) was up to date. It seems to be, but buildign

Re: [lfs-dev] User 'tester' : why is the uid 1000 ?

On Sat, Jun 06, 2020 at 11:55:01PM +0100, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > On Sat, Jun 06, 2020 at 05:03:55PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs via lfs-dev wrote: > > On 6/6/20 4:39 PM, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > > > > > Well, again thanks, but I'm not at all certain. For exam

Re: [lfs-dev] User 'tester' : why is the uid 1000 ?

On Sat, Jun 06, 2020 at 05:03:55PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs via lfs-dev wrote: > On 6/6/20 4:39 PM, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > > > Well, again thanks, but I'm not at all certain. For example, the > > host system is the one where after its first boot I managed to run > &

Re: [lfs-dev] User 'tester' : why is the uid 1000 ?

On Sat, Jun 06, 2020 at 04:02:12PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs via lfs-dev wrote: > On 6/6/20 2:05 PM, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > > I can see that the tester user gets added by a command which uses > > ls -n $(tty) > > and I now see that this results for me in a value of 1000.

[lfs-dev] User 'tester' : why is the uid 1000 ?

I can see that the tester user gets added by a command which uses ls -n $(tty) and I now see that this results for me in a value of 1000. What I don't understand is where that comes from. On my systems user 1000 happens to be the most important regular user (i.e. me) and (after trying a build wi

Re: [lfs-dev] A first new success in my cross-chap5 build

On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 04:12:37AM +0100, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 03:16:51AM +0100, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > > iproute2-5.6.0 - > > We say: This package does not have a working test suite. > > I do not yet have a view on whether or not

Re: [lfs-dev] A first new success in my cross-chap5 build

On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 03:16:51AM +0100, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > > But now I'm running in chroot I'm looking at each testsuite in the > hope that I can get everything to complete (brief note - glibc no > failures on my haswell). And now, the full results of the te

Re: [lfs-dev] test results with locale-archive symlink and vim-8.2.0814 (trunk book)

On Mon, May 25, 2020 at 05:20:44PM +0200, Pierre Labastie via lfs-dev wrote: > On Mon, 2020-05-25 at 16:14 +0200, Pierre Labastie via lfs-dev wrote: > > > > Now this has been done with /dev/pts bind mounted. Let's try with > > /dev/pts mounted normally... > > > > Same, that is: no /dev/tty error.

Re: [lfs-dev] test results with locale-archive symlink and vim-8.2.0814 (trunk book)

On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 10:16:34PM +0100, Ken Moffat wrote: > On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 07:35:10PM +0200, Pierre Labastie via lfs-dev wrote: > > On Sun, 2020-05-24 at 16:44 +0200, Pierre Labastie via lfs-dev wrote: > > > Hi, > > > Here are test results from a jhalfs run: > > > [... > > > > about vim

Re: [lfs-dev] test results with locale-archive symlink and vim-8.2.0814 (trunk book)

On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 07:35:10PM +0200, Pierre Labastie via lfs-dev wrote: > On Sun, 2020-05-24 at 16:44 +0200, Pierre Labastie via lfs-dev wrote: > > Hi, > > Here are test results from a jhalfs run: > > [... > > about vim test > > === > > [...] > > --

[lfs-dev] Automake: skip tags-lisp-space.sh

At the moment we have a known failure in automake-1.16.2, tags-lisp-space.sh. This fails because etags is not present. The test tagsub similarly wants to use etags, but for that the test is skipped. The difference is that tagsub has required=etags whereas tags-lisp-space.sh has required='' Th

[lfs-dev] A first new success in my cross-chap5 build

I said I was going to try cross-chap5, and I'd intended to keep quiet about it until I completed - as I said before, I don't think that entering chroot in chapter 5 is a good idea - but that, and various minor points can wait. I'm continuing to set /etc/passwd and /etc/group on the way into chroot

Re: [lfs-dev] CFLAGS in fixing up for gcc-10.

On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 09:21:00AM +0200, Pierre Labastie via lfs-dev wrote: > On Thu, 2020-05-14 at 05:33 +0100, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > > I notice that in some places people have overridden any existing > > CFLAGS when adding -fcommon. In most places, for those of us w

Re: [lfs-dev] CFLAGS in fixing up for gcc-10.

On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 08:53:18AM -0500, Douglas R. Reno via lfs-dev wrote: > > On 5/14/20 1:33 AM, Xi Ruoyao via lfs-dev wrote: > > On 2020-05-13 23:46 -0500, Bruce Dubbs via lfs-dev wrote: > > > On 5/13/20 11:33 PM, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > > > > I notic

[lfs-dev] CFLAGS in fixing up for gcc-10.

I notice that in some places people have overridden any existing CFLAGS when adding -fcommon. In most places, for those of us who care the fix is obvious (CFLAGS="$CFLAGS -fcommon"). One or two packages will turn out to be more painful. The first I've found is freeglut, where the book uses

Re: [lfs-dev] Libcap 2.34 will not install .pc files in correct location

On Tue, May 05, 2020 at 07:41:58PM +0300, Firas Khalil Khana via lfs-dev wrote: > Confirming an issue is top-posting? > Any post where the reply comes before the item to which you are replying or commenting is top posting. > I didn't know that, and for that I apologize... > So, here you have a

Re: [lfs-dev] Test failure in man-db

On Mon, May 04, 2020 at 07:24:45PM +0100, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > > When I get back to my system where I was trying to fix this I'll try > to remember to check that all 13 bison failures were locale-related. > If they were, for my own builds I'll go back to expect

Re: [lfs-dev] Reduce Temporary System Components and Reorder Basic System Software

On Mon, May 04, 2020 at 08:39:24PM +0300, Firas Khalil Khana via lfs-dev wrote: > Hey there, > > My name is Firas Khalil Khana, and I'm the creator of glaucus > . > > I'd like to salute your efforts for keeping this project awesome this whole > time! The shear amoun

Re: [lfs-dev] Test failure in man-db

On Mon, May 04, 2020 at 10:57:23AM -0500, Bruce Dubbs via lfs-dev wrote: > On 5/4/20 3:22 AM, Pierre Labastie via lfs-dev wrote: > > On Mon, 2020-05-04 at 06:51 +0100, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > > Does this pass after rebooting into the new LFS system? If so, I think w

Re: [lfs-dev] Test failure in man-db

On Mon, May 04, 2020 at 10:22:22AM +0200, Pierre Labastie via lfs-dev wrote: > On Mon, 2020-05-04 at 06:51 +0100, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > > On Mon, May 04, 2020 at 12:51:34PM +0800, Xi Ruoyao via lfs-dev > > wrote: > > > > Doesn't really explain why

Re: [lfs-dev] Test failure in man-db

On Mon, May 04, 2020 at 12:50:12PM +0800, Xi Ruoyao via lfs-dev wrote: > On 2020-05-04 04:12 +0100，Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > > On Mon, May 04, 2020 at 03:34:53AM +0100, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > > > On Mon, May 04, 2020 at 09:53:04AM +0800, Xi Ruoyao via lfs-dev wrot

Re: [lfs-dev] Test failure in man-db

On Mon, May 04, 2020 at 12:51:34PM +0800, Xi Ruoyao via lfs-dev wrote: > > > > Doesn't really explain why man-db has sometimes failed, but passed > > other times (for various builders). Maybe there is something else > > there. > > In sysv book, there was no util-linux in chap. 5 (until Pierre ad

Re: [lfs-dev] Test failure in man-db

On Sun, May 03, 2020 at 09:13:27PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs via lfs-dev wrote: > On 5/3/20 8:15 PM, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > > > root in chroot /# export LC_ALL=en_US.iISO-8859-1 && date > > bash: warning: setlocale: LC_ALL: cannot change locale (en_US.ISO-8859-1): >

Re: [lfs-dev] Test failure in man-db

On Mon, May 04, 2020 at 03:34:53AM +0100, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > On Mon, May 04, 2020 at 09:53:04AM +0800, Xi Ruoyao via lfs-dev wrote: > > On 2020-05-04 02:15 +0100, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > > > On Sun, May 03, 2020 at 04:18:57AM +0100, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev

Re: [lfs-dev] Test failure in man-db

On Mon, May 04, 2020 at 09:53:04AM +0800, Xi Ruoyao via lfs-dev wrote: > On 2020-05-04 02:15 +0100, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > > On Sun, May 03, 2020 at 04:18:57AM +0100, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > > > I'm building with LFS as at 25th April. My previous build w

Re: [lfs-dev] Test failure in man-db

On Sun, May 03, 2020 at 04:18:57AM +0100, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > I'm building with LFS as at 25th April. My previous build was in > early April, and I think this is the first time I've seen a failure > in the man-db tests. With man-db-2.9.1 : > > FAIL: man-mis

Re: [lfs-dev] Test failure in man-db

On Sun, May 03, 2020 at 12:02:12PM +0800, Xi Ruoyao via lfs-dev wrote: > On 2020-05-03 04:18 +0100, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > > I'm building with LFS as at 25th April. My previous build was in > > early April, and I think this is the first time I've seen a failur

Re: [lfs-dev] Test failure in man-db

On Sat, May 02, 2020 at 10:58:11PM -0500, Douglas R. Reno via lfs-dev wrote: > > On 5/2/20 10:18 PM, Ken Moffat via lfs-dev wrote: > > I'm building with LFS as at 25th April. My previous build was in > > early April, and I think this is the first time I've seen a fai

[lfs-dev] Test failure in man-db

I'm building with LFS as at 25th April. My previous build was in early April, and I think this is the first time I've seen a failure in the man-db tests. With man-db-2.9.1 : FAIL: man-missing-locales and src/tests/test-suite.log has: FAIL: man-missing-locales = co

  1   2   3   >