On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 6:43 PM, robert baker<robertmba...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 1:09 PM, Robert > Connolly<rob...@linuxfromscratch.org> wrote: >> >> See if this patch helps: >> http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewvc/devel/libcap/libcap-2.16-headerfix.patch?view=co > > > I will give that a try tonight. I did find a patch created by the > fedora team when I was going through this, but I don't know if that > was it. The one I found did not fix the build failure. More on this > after I escape work. > > >> >> LFS is using --with-installed-readline (system readline). There must be a way >> to make it work. > > Ah. I missed the fact that they had moved up to bash-4.0 in the > development version. I will dig into this tonight as well so I can > figure out what is amiss with my readline installation. Thanks for the > pointer. > > >> I'm also working on glibc-2.10.1 patches. The existing patches have a couple >> problems. >> >> I simplified the arc4random patch, using netbsd's arc4random.c ported to >> linux. Made __arc4random_stir a weak alias so the internal version is always >> used, and so it never conflicts with a function in the application or another >> library. I'm figuring out a test suite for arc4random() just to see that it >> works. >> >> The mktemp_urandom patch uses the wrong error number when /dev/urandom >> doesn't >> exist. >> >> Fixed mkstemps to use /dev/urandom. I found a test suite from INN (the news >> daemon). >> >> Made strlcat/strlcpy non-static, so they're in the shared library. This will >> break binary compatibility with other distributions. I found a test suite >> from INN. >> >> Some of the patches were using read(), instead of __read(). Fixed that. > > I am eager to get my hands on your work for the next go around. I was > more or less concerned about getting a grasp on test suite failures > throughout the book this last time around. Considering how clean > things are with the tests I am very pleased with the direction things > are going. > > >> What's the view on upgrading GCC? >> >> robert >> > > I am all for staying current so long as there are no breakages. I > would be more than willing to do a test build with an upgraded GCC > this next run through. Are you talking about moving up to GCC-4.4.0 or > do you have another release in mind? > > Would you be interested in outlining any goals that you would like to > see set for the "stable" revision of the book? I am absolutely > interested in lending a hand wherever I can. > > Robert Baker > -- > http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/hlfs-dev > FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ > Unsubscribe: See the above information page >
Hey alright, libcap patch went in perfectly, and compiled perfectly. libc(latest git) compiled perfectly, and installed. Thanks for the patch. -- Justin P. Mattock -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/hlfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
