Clemens HAUPT wrote:
Am Tuesday 10 January 2006 02:37 schrieb Jeremy Huntwork :
What on earth are you talking about? Of course the CD is bootable.
That's why it's called a LiveCD.
Being in hell and damnation it's not fair to make fun of me.
Of course I did get the iso image,
of course I did
Am Tuesday 10 January 2006 02:37 schrieb Jeremy Huntwork :
>What on earth are you talking about? Of course the CD is bootable.
>That's why it's called a LiveCD.
Being in hell and damnation it's not fair to make fun of me.
Of course I did get the iso image,
of course I did burn it on a CD,
of co
tcp wrote:
> Trying to install from the livecd v. 6.1.1.3 stable version and also the
> 6.2 pre2 version using the ALFS script but I cannot seem to be able to
> get pass the binutils compiling. If I am able to get pass the binutils I
> get the same error when it tries to compile the glibc-2.3.4.
>
Trying to install from the livecd v. 6.1.1.3 stable version and also the
6.2 pre2 version using the ALFS script but I cannot seem to be able to
get pass the binutils compiling. If I am able to get pass the binutils I
get the same error when it tries to compile the glibc-2.3.4.
The hard drive
Clemens HAUPT wrote:
> Absolutly right. BUT!
> You can't do anything with all this nice packages, they are all of
> no use. One might present them to grandma, but neither oneself
> nor grandma can do anything with it when you don't have
> a LINUX Kernel not 2.6 on a single machine.
> The liveCD i
Clemens HAUPT wrote:
Am Monday 09 January 2006 23:43 schrieben Sie:
This would work. You could also download the LFS live cd.
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/livecd/
I did it. But what for? For making a bootable CD I need a host
using Kernel 2.6 at least. With a machine with older Kernel the
Am Monday 09 January 2006 23:38 schrieben Sie:
>> one of LFS6.1 I have to have kernel >2.6.
>> Please help from driving crazy :-[
>There's a LiveCD made just for building LFS:
>http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/livecd/
Well, that's just the place where I did get all the files
>That CD should conta
Am Monday 09 January 2006 23:43 schrieben Sie:
>I may have been too harsh about the glibc build, but I think your
>kernel is too old.
Well thank you so much Dan for all your writing.
The Kernel I have works fine even being too old ;-)
>I just looked on the debian website. It says that there is
On 1/9/06, Clemens HAUPT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Don't go on. Your glibc is not built. You'll fail later and have to
> >start over from here.
>
> I intend to say, I hate to read that. I will need at least five minutes to
> overcome that.
I may have been too harsh about the glibc build, but
Clemens HAUPT wrote:
> I had a working LiveCD - bootable - from LFS 5, but for building
> one of LFS6.1 I have to have kernel >2.6.
> Please help from driving crazy :-[
>
There's a LiveCD made just for building LFS:
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/livecd/
That CD should contain all of the corre
Am Monday 09 January 2006 21:43 schrieben Sie:
>On 1/9/06, Clemens HAUPT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >Could you please tell me the output of
>> >
>> >autoconf --version
>>
>> It is: Autoconf version 2:13
>
>Thanks. I think glibc is using autoconf 2.59, and your autoconf is
>incompatible. LFS sh
Am Monday 09 January 2006 21:36 schrieben Sie:
>> And now I don't know how to go on. If I can ignore that or what otherwise
>> can happen. I'll try to go on I think
>
>What is the output of uname -r ?
uname -r
2.4.18-bf2.4
This is a debian 3.1 host
Of course it's quite old, but I have to start
Am Monday 09 January 2006 19:37 schrieben Sie:
Hi Dan!
Here is the personal protocol of what I did.
I did have to add AUTOCONF=no really several times
___
make check AUTOCONF=no
FATAL: kernel too old
make[2]: *** [/mnt/lfs/sources/glibc-build/csu/tst-empt
On 1/9/06, Clemens HAUPT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >Could you please tell me the output of
> >
> >autoconf --version
>
> It is: Autoconf version 2:13
Thanks. I think glibc is using autoconf 2.59, and your autoconf is
incompatible. LFS shouldn't require that the host have this newer
autoco
Clemens HAUPT wrote:
FATAL: kernel too old
make[2]: *** [/mnt/lfs/sources/glibc-build/sunrpc/xbootparam_prot.stmp] Error 1
make[2]: Leaving directory `/mnt/lfs/sources/glibc-2.3.4/sunrpc'
make[1]: *** [sunrpc/others] Error 2
make[1]: Leaving directory `/mnt/lfs/sources/glibc-2.3.4'
make: *** [all
Am Monday 09 January 2006 19:37 schrieben Sie:
>On 1/9/06, Clemens HAUPT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >make AUTOCONF=no
>>
>> Done. STARTED! It started working absolutly mad! ;-)
Sorry, is crazy the better word?
>Clemens,
>
>Could you please tell me the output of
>
>autoconf --version
It is: Au
S. Anthony Sequeira schreef:
On Sun, 2006-01-08 at 21:44 +, Cliff McDiarmid wrote:
No probs. I have just changed the hda9 partition, which was giving
the error, back to ext2.
Can't see anything wrong with it. Sorry. What intrigued me is that you
got an error even if the line w
On 1/9/06, Clemens HAUPT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >make AUTOCONF=no
>
> Done. STARTED! It started working absolutly mad! ;-)
Clemens,
Could you please tell me the output of
autoconf --version
That would help determine where the problem is.
--
Dan
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/list
Am Monday 09 January 2006 19:00 schrieben Sie:
>Clemens HAUPT wrote:
>> While searching and seaching
>> I found that:
>>
>> Is it of any use?
>
>Seriously, you'd get more support if you didn't use attachments, or if
>you do, use non-compressed text attachments.
OH!
I beg your pardon!
I'm used to d
On 1/9/06, Clemens HAUPT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> While searching and seaching
> I found that:
>
> Is it of any use?
I have no idea.
1. Did you try what I suggested: "make AUTOCONF=no" ?
2. You may need autoconf-2.5.9 for this to work otherwise. What's
the output of "autoconf --version" ?
>On 1/9/06, Clemens HAUPT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Sorry for inconvenience,
>
>No inconvenience. In the future, even if you're attaching a file,
>please post the relevant error in the email so everyone knows what
>they're dealing with.
Thank you so much for your hint
>In your case, your b
On Sun, 2006-01-08 at 21:44 +, Cliff McDiarmid wrote:
> No probs. I have just changed the hda9 partition, which was giving
> the error, back to ext2.
Can't see anything wrong with it. Sorry. What intrigued me is that you
got an error even if the line was quoted out, yes?
--
S. Anthony Se
Clemens HAUPT wrote:
While searching and seaching
I found that:
Is it of any use?
Seriously, you'd get more support if you didn't use attachments, or if
you do, use non-compressed text attachments.
--
JH
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfrom
While searching and seaching
I found that:
Is it of any use?
glibc-build-desaster-II.bz2
Description: BZip2 compressed data
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
On 1/9/06, Clemens HAUPT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sorry for inconvenience,
No inconvenience. In the future, even if you're attaching a file,
please post the relevant error in the email so everyone knows what
they're dealing with. In your case, your building glibc in section
5.6, and the erro
Sorry for inconvenience,
I don't want to disturb.
But!
If you are so kind to spend a little time for me,
please read the attachment and be sure of all my
thankfullness ;-)
glibc-build-desaster.bz2
Description: BZip2 compressed data
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ
can anyone send me a good link to reseach how to set up my wireless card
in the LFS environment
my ubuntu setup reports this from iwconfig:
lono wireless extensions.
eth0 no wireless extensions.
ra0 RT2500 Wireless ESSID:"NETGEAR"
Mode:Managed Frequency=2.412 GHz
Hi,
this is the same error I was getting and I had
problems with PERL
the details can be see at ...
http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/showthread.php?t=397206
try running the test .. perhaps you will only need to
rename some files ..
Hardik.
--- "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
IraqiGeek wrote:
On Sunday, January 08, 2006 2:07 PM GMT,
i040866 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Everyone.
I have a doubt. I have a AMD Turion 64 MT, and I want to install a
linux from scratch on in, but I do not know if I should use asm-i386
linux libc headers,
or asm-x86_64. When I do uname I
29 matches
Mail list logo
