Le 23/03/2014 10:36, m...@pc-networking-services.com a écrit :
>>> On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 01:01:18PM +1300, m...@pc-networking-services.com
>>> wrote:
>>>> Hello,
>>>> Well this is ridiculous.  I have reached the point after a few days of
>>>> installing the systemd 7.5 version of LFS, and going through the
>>>> configuration of quite a number of other packages following BLFS 7.5
>>>> stable to the point of having a working graphical interface, so decide
>>>> now
>>>> is a good time to install java again.
>>>> I set everything up as per the instructions, which I did when I first
>>>> set
>>>> it up following the previous version of LFS.
>>>> [...]
>>>> make/sanity-rules.gmk:71: recipe for target 'post-sanity' failed
>>>> make[1]: *** [post-sanity] Error 1
>>>> make[1]: Leaving directory '/opt/icedtea-2.4.1/openjdk-boot'
>>>> Makefile:2465: recipe for target 'stamps/icedtea-boot.stamp' failed
>>>> make: *** [stamps/icedtea-boot.stamp] Error 2
>> [...]
> Hello again,
> I have done some digging around on google and find that this issue was
> first reported in JULY last year about people compiling on a SYSTEMD
> system.
> Please note right through I have stated SYSTEMD.  There does not appear to
> be a SYSTEMD version of BLFS.  Which would explain why things are not
> working as it seems that only ONE developer actually has a systemd version
> working,
> In the article I found it states this from, I believe possibly someone who
> had been involved in developing for LFS/BLFS at the time:
>  Tushar Teredesai | 31 Jul 17:57 2013
> Re: compiling java on the systemd lfs branch fails
> On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 8:59 PM, Nathan Coulson <conathan <at> gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> I guess the two choices would be to move those programs back to /bin
>> in the systemd branch,  patch java in the systemd version to not use
>> hardcoded paths, or patch both variations of blfs.
> When I first compiled jdk for lfs, I had patched their build system to
> use the program versions from PATH instead of hardcoded locations. The
> patch may have been dropped at some point. This flexibility of using
> commands from the path is useful for lfsers who have their homegrown
> package manager which replaces the standard file copy/move commands
> with their own logging versions.
> --Tushar.
> Now I need to ask, where is this patch?  I need java working and I need
> the patch.
> The link to the BLFS-Dev where this was posted is:
> http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lfs.beyond.devel/24299
> I see that Bruce, who seems to still be actively involved did not like the
> suggestion of sym-linking, so now I am left with a system that can not be
> completed as the INSTRUCTIONS are lacking and incorrect for a SYSTEMD
> system.
> Regards,
> Christopher.

Hi Christopher,

I understand your frustration, but nobody is in charge of a systemd BLFS
version, so you are on your own building BLFS above LFS-systemd.

For the issues you have, you may have a look at:
as well as the current:

You could also try to see where the various XXX_YYY_PATH variables are defined
and change them to all begin with /usr.

FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Reply via email to