Hi,
in the lfs-book you need some patches. I wonder, why these patches are
needed? Are the upstream-sources not able to be compiled without?
Thanks!
Best Regards
Stefan
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: Se
On Thu, 2013-05-16 at 09:03 +0200, Stefan & Rebekka Wetter wrote:
> Hi,
>
> in the lfs-book you need some patches. I wonder, why these patches are
> needed? Are the upstream-sources not able to be compiled without?
Depends on the patch. Some are upstream fixes not yet in an upstream
release. Oth
On 5/16/2013 12:03 AM, Stefan & Rebekka Wetter wrote:
> Hi,
>
> in the lfs-book you need some patches. I wonder, why these patches are
> needed? Are the upstream-sources not able to be compiled without?
>
> Thanks!
>
> Best Regards
> Stefan
>
The number of patches in LFS is very small compared to
Em 16-05-2013 06:30, Alice Wonder escreveu:
> On 5/16/2013 12:03 AM, Stefan & Rebekka Wetter wrote:
...
>> in the lfs-book you need some patches. I wonder, why
...
> The number of patches in LFS is very small compared to the number of
> patches in any Linux distribution I have ever used.
>
>
Am 16.5.2013 03:03, schrieb Stefan & Rebekka Wetter:
> I wonder, why these patches are needed?
> Are the upstream-sources not able to be compiled without?
Good questions (as they say). While trying to stay on topic,
I'll take the liberty and rephrase them to
Why are patches needed at all?
for my
On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 12:37:21PM -0400, alex lupu wrote:
>
> So on this particular example (but much more widespread, as I said)
> my obsessive question was (and still is):
>
> How do some other people compile their package, and in what
> configurations so that they are obviously NOT in need of
I have sent this in the morning, about 7 hours ago, it never appeared.
Now, I have edited some words to see if the anti-spam was blocking them.
Mensagem original
Assunto: Re: [lfs-support] why does LFS need that number of patches
Data: Thu, 16 May 2013 07:38:49 -0300
De: Fernan
>On Thu, 16 May 2013 15:22:19 -0300
>Fernando wrote:
>
> I have sent this in the morning, about 7 hours ago, it never appeared.
>
> Now, I have edited some words to see if the anti-spam was blocking
> them.
It arrived for me, as well as the follow-up email.
Perhaps Yahoo is also using the echo-
>On Thu, 16 May 2013 12:37:21 -0400
>alex lupu wrote:
>
> Am 16.5.2013 03:03, schrieb Stefan & Rebekka Wetter:
> > I wonder, why these patches are needed?
> > Are the upstream-sources not able to be compiled without?
>
> Good questions (as they say). While trying to stay on topic,
> I'll take th
Le 16/05/2013 20:22, Fernando a écrit :
> I have sent this in the morning, about 7 hours ago, it never appeared.
Actually, I got it at 12:38 (western European time),
while the one where you added the above sentence
arrived at 20:22. Both are on gmane too...
Regards
Pierre
--
http://linuxfromscra
Ken Moffat wrote:
> I don't think that worrying over the need for patches is a good
> use of time
I agree with this, but remember the slogan of LFS. 'Your distro, your
rules'. Users are free to use patches or not. The thing to remember is
that the LFS editors don't like patches, but only a
On 5/16/2013 1:04 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
*snip*
>
> Finally, there are philosophically no differences between a sed and a
> patch. Both have the same purpose--to enhance the user experience. We
> prefer using a sed because the changes made is more visible.
>
> -- Bruce
>
I prefer sed for mi
Em 16-05-2013 16:44, Aleksandar Kuktin escreveu:
>> On Thu, 16 May 2013 15:22:19 -0300
>> Fernando wrote:
>>
>> I have sent this in the morning, about 7 hours ago, it never appeared.
>>
>> Now, I have edited some words to see if the anti-spam was blocking
>> them.
>
> It arrived for me, as well as
On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 09:44:50PM +0200, Aleksandar Kuktin wrote:
> >On Thu, 16 May 2013 15:22:19 -0300
> >Fernando wrote:
> >
> > I have sent this in the morning, about 7 hours ago, it never appeared.
> >
> > Now, I have edited some words to see if the anti-spam was blocking
> > them.
>
> It a
Hi Aleksandar,
You wrote (excerpt):
I just went back to analyze the bug report and your fix that you
reported in the mail, and the only logical explanation is that your (or
any LFS') copy of db2html did something different than the developers
copy of db2html. If db2html is generated during the bui
On 5/16/2013 2:08 PM, alex lupu wrote:
>
> BTW, a "patch" is mostly in the eye of the beholder; some call many of
> them, "sed".
>
>
Cute, I like it.
Submitting sed scripts upstream though seems to be frowned upon, they
like patches.
I agree with the concept of minimal patches. I think over-pa
Ken Moffat wrote:
> On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 09:44:50PM +0200, Aleksandar Kuktin wrote:
>>> On Thu, 16 May 2013 15:22:19 -0300
>>> Fernando wrote:
>>>
>>> I have sent this in the morning, about 7 hours ago, it never appeared.
>>>
>>> Now, I have edited some words to see if the anti-spam was blockin
Alice Wonder wrote:
> On 5/16/2013 2:08 PM, alex lupu wrote:
>
>>
>> BTW, a "patch" is mostly in the eye of the beholder; some call many of
>> them, "sed".
>>
>>
>
> Cute, I like it.
> Submitting sed scripts upstream though seems to be frowned upon, they
> like patches.
Generally, they want to pa
18 matches
Mail list logo
