On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 08:29:38PM -0400, Isaac D. Cohen wrote: > ---- On Wed, 21 Jun 2017 19:59:23 -0400 Ken Moffat > <[email protected]> wrote ---- > On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 06:49:11PM -0400, Isaac D. Cohen wrote: > p { margin-bottom: 0.1in; line-height: 120%; } >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> Your mailer (Zoho Mail) is converting '>' to html, which makes your reply rally hard to read.
> > >That seems an odd place to build LFS, unless you intend to tar it up > >and install it elsewhere. I don't think that oddity is related to > >the problem, but when you get to the end of the book and try to boot > >the new LFS it needs to be the top level directory in its > >filesystem. To try to be clear, /mnt/lfs/ should be a separate > >filesystem, with at this stage some directories including bin and > >tools, so that when it boots that bin directory will be /bin. > > >According to my logs, glibc installed all those libraries in > >/tools/lib. Perhaps something is wrong with the /tools symlink ? > I checked the /tools symlink. ls /tools produced the same results as ls > /media/isaac/LFS/Programs/Compiler. So the symlink seems to be working. > > >You should be able to run > > >ls -l /tools/lib/libc.so.6 > > >and > > >find /media/isaac/LFS/ -name libc.so.6 > > > The former command produces the following output: > > > lrwxrwxrwx 1 isaac isaac 12 Jun 21 17:25 /tools/lib/libc.so.6 -> > libc-2.25.so > So, on the face of it, the symlink is correct. > > I checked in the forlder and both of those files are there so what can I do > to help gcc find them? > But for that I have no idea. I repeat what I said earlier - /mnt/lfs needs to be its own filesystem. Several years ago certain things were hard-coded in some toolchain patches, but I think we've moved beyond that. Either /media/isaac/LFS _is_ a separate filesystem (but if it is, why not just mount it at /mnt/lfs ?), or it isn't and you won't be able to boot the completed system. Yes, people try all sorts of things like building and then copying it to a USB stick and trying to boot that. We only hear from the people who try that but fail, and the general advice is to do it conventionally (in its own filesystem on an existing disk) until you have ironed out things like the kernel config and getting whatever you need to be able to _use_ the completed system (e.g. some way of downloading new packages). As Bruce said - until you understand what is going on, do not deviate from the book. When you first posted, you ignored errors in the lists of required packages (/bin/sh -> dash, and awk -> mawk). Things like that, and the sanity check where you are now stuck, have been added over the years to reduce problems. Once you have successfully built and booted LFS, and begun to understand how the build works, then trying different things is fine. But if any or all of those changes break the build, you get to keep the pieces (been there, often) and hopefully you will learn enough to be able to diagnose the problem. At the moment you don't seem to be following the details of the book, and you probably don't yet have the skills to diagnose the errors. So, FBBG (Follow Book, Book Good). ĸen -- I live in a city. I know sparrows from starlings. After that everything is a duck as far as I'm concerned. -- Monstrous Regiment -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page Do not top post on this list. A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style
