OK I thought I'd try to run through the LFS install. I'm using a
basic Fedora Code 4 host minimal install with a few extra RPMs so I
can build.
Binutils pass 1 makes and installs but I get the following when I try
to create a LIB_PATH version of ld. The same basic error happens when
I try to com
On Thu, 1 Dec 2005 00:15:36 -0600
Kevin Barnard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> OK I thought I'd try to run through the LFS install. I'm using a
> basic Fedora Code 4 host minimal install with a few extra RPMs so I
> can build.
This is a FAQ. FC4 isn't a suitable host distro.
Read FAQ. Search ar
Kevin Barnard wrote:
OK I thought I'd try to run through the LFS install. I'm using a
basic Fedora Code 4 host minimal install with a few extra RPMs so I
can build.
Binutils pass 1 makes and installs but I get the following when I try
to create a LIB_PATH version of ld. The same basic error ha
Thanks for the tip. Late at night I must of missed the FAQ and for that matter the entire support page. Reinstall to a different disro no problem. I have a debian copy sitting around. Guess this is what I get for being lazy and not wanting to reinstall the toy/learning machine. :-)
On 12/1/05,
On 12/1/05, Kevin Barnard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 12/1/05, Andrew Benton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hey, Kevin. Please don't top post and trim your reply to only what's relevant.
--
Dan
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/f
Andrew Benton wrote:
Bing. You hit the nail on the head there. As Richard said, Fedora Core 4
isn't a suitable distro to build the stable version of the book. It
should work OK for the development version but that may not be suitable
if it's your first attempt at LFS. I've had good results bui
On Thu, 01 Dec 2005 10:04:50 -0500
Jeremy Huntwork <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Andrew Benton wrote:
>
> > Bing. You hit the nail on the head there. As Richard said, Fedora Core 4
> > isn't a suitable distro to build the stable version of the book. It
> > should work OK for the development vers
Hi Richard and folks,
> IIRC, Fedora patches the hell out of GCC-4 so that it isn't a regular
> GCC-4 anymore. I don't feel up to searching out all the threads on
> this. I think the best advice is still 'Don't build LFS from FC-4'.
>
> R.
I'm prepared to have another round on building LFS -->
On 12/2/05, Stephen Liu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is there any other recommendation? OR is there any opinon on this
> newly released Slackware 10.2.
Why don't you just use the LiveCD?
Miken
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/
Hi Hari,
> Why don't you just use the LiveCD?
Oh, yes. I have LFS-LiveCD 6.1-3 here. I can't remember exactly
whether it is necessary to intall it on the HD. OR just run it on the
PC to install LFS on the empty HD, preformatted. I suppose I saw
this posting before, installing LFS direct fro
Dan Nicholson wrote:
I don't think, blah, blah...
probably not the place to ask.
Why are you posting this to LFS-Dev?
Andy
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Stephen Liu wrote:
is there any opinon on this
newly released Slackware 10.2.
Slackware uses an obsolete 2.4 kernel. You'll need to compile a 2.6 kernel before you start. http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/stable/prologue/hostreqs.html
Andy
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/list
On Fri, 2 Dec 2005, Andrew Benton wrote:
Slackware uses an obsolete 2.4 kernel. You'll need to compile a 2.6 kernel
Obsolete is a pretty strong word. Is it really obsolete?
Steven
--
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.htm
Stephen Liu wrote:
Hi Hari,
Why don't you just use the LiveCD?
Oh, yes. I have LFS-LiveCD 6.1-3 here. I can't remember exactly
whether it is necessary to intall it on the HD. OR just run it on the
PC to install LFS on the empty HD, preformatted. I suppose I saw
this posting before, inst
Hi Chris,
> No, the LiveCD cannot be installed to the hard drive - that's the
> point
> of the LiveCD.
Tks for your advice. I found the document;
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/hints/downloads/files/install-lfs-from-livecd.txt
By Joseph M. Dupré
DATE: 2005-08-13
SYNOPSIS: How to build a LFS 6
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 2 Dec 2005, Andrew Benton wrote:
Slackware uses an obsolete 2.4 kernel. You'll need to compile a 2.6
kernel
Obsolete is a pretty strong word. Is it really obsolete?
For the purpose of compiling LFS, a 2.4 kernel is obsolete.
Andy
--
http://linuxfromscratch.
Stephen Liu wrote:
Hi Chris,
No, the LiveCD cannot be installed to the hard drive - that's the
point
of the LiveCD.
Tks for your advice. I found the document;
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/hints/downloads/files/install-lfs-from-livecd.txt
By Joseph M. Dupré
DATE: 2005-08-13
SYNOPSIS: How
Hi Chris,
> No, don't use that hint - it gives bad advice. Just boot from the
> livecd, copy source files from /sources to $LFS/sources, and do
> everything else by the book.
OK. Noted with tks.
BR
SL
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratc
On Fri, 2 Dec 2005, Andrew Benton wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 2 Dec 2005, Andrew Benton wrote:
Slackware uses an obsolete 2.4 kernel. You'll need to compile a 2.6
kernel
Obsolete is a pretty strong word. Is it really obsolete?
For the purpose of compiling LFS, a 2.4 kernel is
On Fri, 2 Dec 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Obsolete is a pretty strong word. Is it really obsolete?
For the purpose of compiling LFS, a 2.4 kernel is obsolete.
I've built with 2.4. :)
Steven
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/stable/prologue/hostreqs.html
I have to assume that
I used 6.1.1 that has the patch. (http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/stable/chapter05/binutils-pass1.html) This patched 2 files I think, I'm at work away from the machine so I can't check for sure until later.
The normal make works fine and ld does compile and install. It's the secondary
I think you are right about GCC most of that I think is around GCJ (loads of fun) I'll play around with the newer bintools and gcc and see if I get anywhere with this. Worst case is I run into another wall and have to start over with a more sane distro. In either case I'll let you know the resul
Kevin Barnard wrote:
I think you are right about GCC most of that I think is around GCJ
(loads of fun)
1) Please don't post in HTML
2) Please don't top-post
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/index.html#netiquette
--
JH
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http:/
> No, the LiveCD cannot be installed to the hard drive - that's the point of
> the LiveCD.
That's not true. I've got the LiveCD installed on a partition, and have been
using that for my builds. LFS 6.1 is the only distro I've found, in my very
quick research, that met all of the host require
Richard Westfield wrote:
No, the LiveCD cannot be installed to the hard drive - that's the point of the
LiveCD.
That's not true. I've got the LiveCD installed on a partition, and have been using that for my builds. LFS 6.1 is the only distro I've found, in my very quick research, that met al
On 12/2/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Dec 2005, Andrew Benton wrote:
>
> Slackware uses an obsolete 2.4 kernel. You'll need to compile a 2.6 kernel
>
> Obsolete is a pretty strong word. Is it really obsolete?
Just for academic interest, I bought an 8 proc IBM eServe
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> On Fri, 2 Dec 2005, Andrew Benton wrote:
>>
>>> Slackware uses an obsolete 2.4 kernel. You'll need to compile a 2.6
>>> kernel
>>
>> Obsolete is a pretty strong word. Is it really obsolete?
Andy wrote:
>For the purpose of compiling LFS, a 2.4 kernel is obsolete.
N
27 matches
Mail list logo
