Fernando de Oliveira wrote:
On 08-02-2015 23:18, Alexey Orishko wrote:
On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 3:10 AM, Alexey Orishko > As Armin suggested,
I've tried nasm-2.11.05 and syslinux build
finished without any errors.
Is a build failure related to nasm-2.11.06 a reason to consider a
different NASM version for the book release? I can use whatever I need
in my build, but other might also face similar problems...
Got reply on syslinux mail list:
On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 3:07 AM, Jonathan Boeing
<[email protected]> wrote:
I had the same failure with 2.11.06, but the latest snapshot is working
correctly for me.
See http://sourceforge.net/p/nasm/mailman/message/33074214/
It looks like either nasm-2.11.05 or a latest nasm snapshot is a
better choice...
I'm trying to understand implications of the three alternatives:
1. downgrade
2. leave as is
3. use a snapshot or equivalent patch.
Don't have an opinion about it, don't want to decide anything.
Search of nasm package wich is dependent in SVN finds(no comment after a
package means it builds with current nasm):
libvpx (compiling with NASM-2.11.05 or NASM-2.11.06 is currently broken)
flac
sdl
lame
libjpeg-turbo
tigervnc (nasm isn't actually required - will create a new thread about
this)
For what the book needs, current version seems to work. Only problem,
libvpx, is marked as broken with the downgrade candidate, in BLFS-7.6.
I'll get a snapshot and create a diff from 2.11.06 and see if I can figure out
anything from that.
-- Bruce
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
