> kernel driver was missing. A little more investigating and I found that I'd > mis-GRUBbed something and had booted Manjaro using my LFS kernel. Aside > from the missing wifi module, at least I know I'd recompiled the kernel > properly - I just put it in the wrong place.
Go sit under a tree, spend some "skull sweat" and imagine a reliable process of how you can manage a dual- or triple-boot environment, and then make up scripts that will do it properly in each system. Don't try to "wing-it" everytime! [Framebuffers] > > I don't know/don't remember. But I'll look into. Another nice tip. Although > I really do want to get my mad-scientist experiments off my so-called > "work" computer. What did you set in this last kernel build? Look in /usr/src/linux-X.Y.Z/.config. My scripts, mentioned above, get me through the kernel configuration bit, then ask me if I've changed my mind, then quit before compiling if I answer "y". So I can check .config the regular way. ;-) > > It's also got to be legible on a wide variety of screens! :-) For this kind of kernel you want to use "bog-standard" VGA drivers, no extra nothing! You DO NOT want to boot into the GUI so screen resolution is irrelevant, this is for rescue operations! All you want is the command line and access to the base system standalone. If you can do that then anything is possible. If you can't, nothing is possible. > > Oh, and if the machine's CPU is not the same as, or a superset of, > the machine on which you built LFS, you may need to rebuild gmp if > you didn't use the configfsf scripts. And although I'm a fan of > using '-march=native' in my CFLAGS, that is fairly catastrophic for > trying to build for a different micro-architecture :) > > ĸen Ken's right, GMP is going to be a PITA. But RTFM, there are ways to build, i.e. crosscompile, it for a lowest common denominator CPU. I always do, because the marginal performance improvements are worth less to me than the ability to use any hardware in an emergency! > > This might be part of my problem. My initial LFS build was constructed on a > Core i7. The machine I want to continue LFS'ing on is only a Core i5. I Been there, done that. The problem is, sometimes you might get away with it, sometimes not. IMO it's not worth the hassle of an optimized GMP. But then my RoT is: I'm not interested in any "better performace" trick or upgrade unless it's nearly 100% faster, and that hardly happens these days. Back when I started with a 2MHz 8080, it was easy! > Regardless, this (older, i5) machine has a fresh Manjaro install and I'm > starting LFS over, using the development branch this time around. I know > the risks and hazards and further complications that may entail, but > breaking and fixing things is my definition of "fun". NOOoooooo! You don't break and fix things until you've got it working. > important question is: when I get this version booting and running, do I > get to be Counted a second time? :-) Also NO. -- Paul Rogers [email protected] Rogers' Second Law: "Everything you do communicates." (I do not personally endorse any additions after this line. TANSTAAFL :-) -- 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
