On 02/17/2014 08:33 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote: > Fernando de Oliveira wrote: >> Em 17-02-2014 14:34, Pierre Labastie escreveu: >> >>> I do not know the icedtea installer, so I do not know how >>> it gets its information about the LSB. But I think the best >>> would be to consider that everything, which is in LFS, is installed >>> (including /etc/lsb-release), and that lsb-release executable is >>> optional. Ideally, then, the icedtea installer should be taught >>> not to use the executable. Now, if the executable is needed >>> for an easier installation of icedtea-JDK, then it should go to >>> recommended. >> >> Once more: >> >> icedtea install OK without lsb_release >> >> icedtea does not install OK if lsb_release accidentally was installed, >> but the user did not configure it in LFS. >> >> Problem is the divide in configuring before installing, in LFS >> (optional), but nothing being written about configuration in BLFS. > > Add a sed to the lsb_release install instructions: > > sed -i "s|n/a|unavailable|" lsb_release > > Also add a note about configuration and point to LFS. > > If it's really necessary, we can create an LFS specific lsb-release-1.5 > tarball. But I think that's overkill. It really is only a bash script > and a man page generated from the script. > > -- Bruce >
The simple fix is just to link to LFS page and say that /etc/lsb-release must be set up using the instructions in LFS. http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/stable/chapter09/theend.html -- Note: My last name is not Krejzi. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
