[blfs-dev] Re： Question about xinit and other suggestions
>>1. Xinit 1.4.1 >>Can anyone expain why we have to use the parameter >>"--with-xinitdir=/etc/X11/app-defaults" for Xinit? >>That's because I find that the folder "/etc/X11/app-defaults/xinitrc.d" is >>not created while some applications will install thier "sh" >>files to >>"/etc/X11/xinit/xinitrc.d". As a result, those "sh" files will not be read by >>Xinit program. >>2. Qt >>The instruction "cat >> /etc/ld.so.conf << EOF" can be changed to "cat > >>/etc/ld.so.conf.d/qt5.conf". >>3. KDE Frameworks 5 Pre-installation Configuration >>In the section "Installing in /opt", I think the follow lines are missing for >>the file "/etc/profile.d/qt5.sh": >>pathappend /usr/lib/qt5/pluginsQT_PLUGIN_PATH >>pathappend /usr/lib/qt5/qmlQML2_IMPORT_PATH >>Also, it is better to add the following line in the "sh" file: >>pathappend $QT5DIR/plugins/kcmsQT_PLUGIN_PATH >>That's because KDE application "sytemsetting5" will report "the plugin >>kcm_xx was not found" if the above setting is not set. Sorry for the mistake. The line "pathappend $QT5DIR/plugins/kcms" should be changed to "pathappend $KF5_PREFIX/lib/plugins/kcmsQT_PLUGIN_PATH" -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
[blfs-dev] Question about xinit and other suggestions
1. Xinit 1.4.1 Can anyone expain why we have to use the parameter "--with-xinitdir=/etc/X11/app-defaults" for Xinit? That's because I find that the folder "/etc/X11/app-defaults/xinitrc.d" is not created while some applications will install thier "sh" files to "/etc/X11/xinit/xinitrc.d". As a result, those "sh" files will not be read by Xinit program. 2. Qt The instruction "cat >> /etc/ld.so.conf << EOF" can be changed to "cat > /etc/ld.so.conf.d/qt5.conf". 3. KDE Frameworks 5 Pre-installation Configuration In the section "Installing in /opt", I think the follow lines are missing for the file "/etc/profile.d/qt5.sh": pathappend /usr/lib/qt5/pluginsQT_PLUGIN_PATH pathappend /usr/lib/qt5/qmlQML2_IMPORT_PATH Also, it is better to add the following line in the "sh" file: pathappend $QT5DIR/plugins/kcmsQT_PLUGIN_PATH That's because KDE application "sytemsetting5" will report "the plugin kcm_xx was not found" if the above setting is not set. -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] Critical Firefox and Thunderbird 0days
On 2019-06-26 13:52 -0500, Douglas R. Reno via blfs-dev wrote: > On 6/26/19 1:47 PM, Xi Ruoyao via blfs-dev wrote: > > On 2019-06-26 12:22 -0500, Douglas R. Reno via blfs-dev wrote: > > > > > [2]: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/security/advisories/mfsa2019-18/ > > [2] affects mozjs as well. > > > > Should we upgrade mozjs to 60.7.2 or provide a patch? > > We should probably provide a patch, although upgrading is a good option > too considering the fact that it's not a new major version. > > Can you give upgrading a shot? :-) I'll start to download Firefox ESR 60.7.2 and go to sleep. Tomorrow I'll extract mozjs-60.7.2 from it and try upgrading. -- Xi Ruoyao School of Aerospace Science and Technology, Xidian University -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] Critical Firefox and Thunderbird 0days
On 6/26/19 1:47 PM, Xi Ruoyao via blfs-dev wrote: On 2019-06-26 12:22 -0500, Douglas R. Reno via blfs-dev wrote: [2]: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/security/advisories/mfsa2019-18/ [2] affects mozjs as well. Should we upgrade mozjs to 60.7.2 or provide a patch? We should probably provide a patch, although upgrading is a good option too considering the fact that it's not a new major version. Can you give upgrading a shot? :-) -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] Critical Firefox and Thunderbird 0days
On 2019-06-26 12:22 -0500, Douglas R. Reno via blfs-dev wrote: > [2]: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/security/advisories/mfsa2019-18/ [2] affects mozjs as well. Should we upgrade mozjs to 60.7.2 or provide a patch? -- Xi Ruoyao School of Aerospace Science and Technology, Xidian University -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] Since changes are coming...
On Jun 25, 2019 9:46 PM, "DJ Lucas via blfs-dev" < blfs-dev@lists.linuxfromscratch.org> wrote: > > > > On 6/25/2019 6:21 PM, Joe Locash via blfs-dev wrote: >> >> >> Seriously? Ok, so missed a couple of packages. >> >> Maybe I shouldn't contribute to the goal of the project. My bad. >> > Joe, your frustration is noted. Perhaps you wouldn't be if, as editors, we communicated better. Please allow me a moment to alleviate the confusion of why it's a huge difference in effort and provide some unrealized context. DJ, First, I'm not frustrated and if I came off that way, I apologize. It really doesn't matter to me if MATE makes it into the book because I have it working ;) Thanks for the lengthy detailed process on the development cycle of the packages in the book but it really wasn't needed. I too have been doing this stuff for 20+ years. Remember when CDE was going to revolutionize the DE environment on Unix workstations? I only threw the idea out there as an alternative to what's in the book now. You have 4 choices - KDE Plasma which I can't give an opinion on because I never liked KDE. XFCE - nice for lower end machines but needs a bunch of configuration after install. LXDE - great for lower end boxes (and my choice for thin clients), unfortunately there is no active development to support things like Wayland. Gnome3 - obviously supported but looks like crap IMO. I thought MATE would be a nice compromise , and out of the box, doesn't need much (if any for the regular user) configuring. Hopefully this clears some things up. -Joe BTW, lxqt should have never been added to the book. It still isn't ready for prime time. -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
[blfs-dev] Critical Firefox and Thunderbird 0days
Good morning folks, Last week, critical security vulnerabilities were unveiled in Mozilla Firefox and Mozilla Thunderbird [1]. These vulnerabilities allowed for arbitrary code execution, sandbox escape, and denial of service. The problem with these vulnerabilities is that they are being actively exploited against users in the wild, as noted by several different security companies. As a result, we highly recommend updating immediately to Firefox 67.0.4 and Thunderbird-60.7.2. In addition to the two in Firefox [2] [3], there were two sets discovered in Thunderbird as well [4] [5] [6] [7]. Two of the vulnerabilities pertain to the Gecko rendering engine, which contains the security fixes from Firefox. Four of them are new 0days that were found in the libical implementation in Thunderbird. By receiving an email with a corrupted .ics file with a payload in it, a heap-based buffer overflow will occur [8] [9] [10] [11] or type confusion will occur, leading to an exploitable crash, possible arbitrary code execution, and complete destruction of the user's Thunderbird Email profile. This is because of the way that Thunderbird indexes email as it receives it. When Thunderbird processes these emails, it will attempt to index the .ics file, and in the process of opening it to read it's contents, will crash. Upon launching Thunderbird again, it will once again attempt to download the mail and index it, and crash repeatedly as a result. These vulnerabilities were reported to Mozilla in 2016 (2016-06-19) and were never fixed by Mozilla even after they were fixed in libical upstream (2016 as well). A recent development has made it so that PoCs are available and the vulnerabilities are being exploited in the wild. When upgrading Thunderbird, no new package updates will be required if you are running BLFS 8.4. I did not attempt to upgrade an 8.3, 8.2, 8.1, or 8.0 system because I do not have them around at the moment. Unfortunately, if you are upgrading Firefox on a stock 8.4 system, some upgrades need to be done: - NSS (I recommend 3.44, it's got a new root certificate installed) - NSPR (4.21 at minimum, I recommend the latest) - cbindgen (0.8.2 at minimum, I recommend the latest) - SQLite (3.27.2 at minimum, 3.28 is recommended) - Recommended but not required to fix a security flaw: Node.JS to 10.16.0 - Recommended but not required to fix a set of security flaws: wget to 1.200.3 - Recommended but not required to fix another set of security flaws: cURL to 7.65.1 Thank you, Douglas R. Reno LINKS: [1]: https://thehackernews.com/2019/06/firefox-0day-vulnerability.html [2]: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/security/advisories/mfsa2019-18/ [3]: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/security/advisories/mfsa2019-19/ [4]: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/security/advisories/mfsa2019-17/ [5]: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/security/advisories/mfsa2019-20/ [6]: https://www.thunderbird.net/en-US/thunderbird/60.7.2/releasenotes/ [7]: https://www.thunderbird.net/en-US/thunderbird/60.7.1/releasenotes/ [8]: https://seclists.org/oss-sec/2019/q2/157 [9]: https://seclists.org/oss-sec/2019/q2/158 [10]: https://seclists.org/oss-sec/2019/q2/159 [11]: https://seclists.org/oss-sec/2019/q2/160 -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] Xorg authorization problem with elogind
On June 26, 2019 2:22:03 AM CDT, Pierre Labastie via blfs-dev wrote: >On 26/06/2019 05:55, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-dev wrote: >> On 6/25/19 9:54 PM, DJ Lucas via blfs-dev wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 6/25/2019 9:19 PM, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-dev wrote: On 6/25/19 9:08 PM, DJ Lucas via blfs-dev wrote: > > > On 6/25/2019 2:55 PM, Pierre Labastie via blfs-dev wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I've not gone that far with my elogind testing: >> - >> pierre [ ~ ]$ startx >> xauth: file /home/pierre/.serverauth.2289 does not exist >> >> >> X.Org X Server 1.20.4 >> X Protocol Version 11, Revision 0 >> Build Operating System: Linux 5.1.14-lfs-1 x86_64 >> Current Operating System: Linux turbolivirt 5.1.14-lfs-1 #1 SMP >Tue Jun 25 >> 18:58:17 CEST 2019 x86_64 >> Kernel command line: BOOT_IMAGE=/vmlinuz-5.1.14-lfs-SVN-20190618 >> root=/dev/sda2 ro quiet >> Build Date: 24 June 2019 11:57:25AM >> >> Current version of pixman: 0.38.4 >> Before reporting problems, check http://wiki.x.org >> to make sure that you have the latest version. >> Markers: (--) probed, (**) from config file, (==) default >setting, >> (++) from command line, (!!) notice, (II) informational, >> (WW) warning, (EE) error, (NI) not implemented, (??) >unknown. >> (==) Log file: "/home/pierre/.local/share/xorg/Xorg.0.log", Time: >Tue Jun 25 >> 21:44:33 2019 >> (==) Using system config directory "/usr/share/X11/xorg.conf.d" >> (EE) >> Fatal server error: >> (EE) parse_vt_settings: Cannot open /dev/tty0 (Permission denied) >> (EE) >> (EE) >> Please consult the The X.Org Foundation support >> at http://wiki.x.org >> for help. >> (EE) Please also check the log file at >> "/home/pierre/.local/share/xorg/Xorg.0.log" for additional >information. >> (EE) >> (EE) Server terminated with error (1). Closing log file. >> xinit: giving up >> xinit: unable to connect to X server: Connection refused >> xinit: server error >> --- >> >> Two unusual things for me: >> - it seems xorg-server runs as user, or at least not as root >> - the log file is not the usual /var/log/Xorg.0.log (maybe >because of the >> authorization problem... >> >> I've checked the pam files, nothing obvious (I use pwquality for >passwords, >> but I guess it has nothing to do with what is seen here. >> >> Do I need to add myself to a special group (wheel for example)? > > Wait! Check the build order. Was xorg protocol headers installed >before > elogind? For me, yes. Fri 07 Jun 2019 06:00:59 PM CDT /usr/src/xc/prot-headers/xorgproto-2018.4.tar.bz2 Sun 09 Jun 2019 11:16:29 AM CDT >/usr/src/elogind/elogind-241.3.tar.gz -- Bruce >>> Nope, sorry, it's not the headers, it's xtrans, so xorg-libs page. >If xtrans >>> isn't built with sd-daemon.h present, then the tty selection will be >messed. >>> It won't look to dbus (and polkit) for it's authorizations. So just >rebuild >>> xtrans, and then xorg-server without suid, just the wrapper. >> >> Did that, I do have /usr/include/elogind/systemd/sd-daemon.h >> I did 'make clean' and then rebuilt/installed xtrans and xorg-server >using the >> elogind instructions. I still get a message that permission is >denied when >> trying to open virtual console 7. I just checked twm since it is the >simplest. >> >> When I pulled the patches after 241.1 was released with the >>> journal->syslog compatibility stuff, I just copied the original page >and >>> forgot about the dependency. This will fix it, but I totally ruined >Pierre's >>> test run for the deps I think. Dang it! Pierre, can you run just >blfs-tool >>> without actually running the build to see how badly I messed up the >>> ordering. Looking at Bruce's build, it looks like they were two days >apart, >>> but Bruce, correct me if I'm wrong, was running a manually scripted >build. >> >> I have individual scripts for every package. I was looking at each >one so the >> test build was particularly time consuming. >> >> My full build log is at >> >http://anduin.linuxfromscratch.org/~bdubbs/files/packages-SVN-20190603-frodo85.log >> so you can see exactly what I built and in what order, including a >few do-overs. >> > >OK, tried rebuilding xorgproto, xtrans, then xorg-server. That's not >enough... >We have to fix it. Problem is, I must leave for a few days, and I >cannot take >the VM with me (I take a laptop, but I do not have enough disk space to >add a >55Gb file on it...) > >What I'll do with the laptop is rebuilding just Xorg, and try with the >new >order (elogind just after shadow and before anything Xorg related). If >it >works, we'll have to think of the deps in the book... > >I have to travel first, so do not expect any result before tomorrow. > >Regards, > >Pierre >--
Re: [blfs-dev] Xorg authorization problem with elogind
On 26/06/2019 05:55, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-dev wrote: > On 6/25/19 9:54 PM, DJ Lucas via blfs-dev wrote: >> >> >> On 6/25/2019 9:19 PM, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-dev wrote: >>> On 6/25/19 9:08 PM, DJ Lucas via blfs-dev wrote: On 6/25/2019 2:55 PM, Pierre Labastie via blfs-dev wrote: > Hi, > > I've not gone that far with my elogind testing: > - > pierre [ ~ ]$ startx > xauth: file /home/pierre/.serverauth.2289 does not exist > > > X.Org X Server 1.20.4 > X Protocol Version 11, Revision 0 > Build Operating System: Linux 5.1.14-lfs-1 x86_64 > Current Operating System: Linux turbolivirt 5.1.14-lfs-1 #1 SMP Tue Jun 25 > 18:58:17 CEST 2019 x86_64 > Kernel command line: BOOT_IMAGE=/vmlinuz-5.1.14-lfs-SVN-20190618 > root=/dev/sda2 ro quiet > Build Date: 24 June 2019 11:57:25AM > > Current version of pixman: 0.38.4 > Before reporting problems, check http://wiki.x.org > to make sure that you have the latest version. > Markers: (--) probed, (**) from config file, (==) default setting, > (++) from command line, (!!) notice, (II) informational, > (WW) warning, (EE) error, (NI) not implemented, (??) unknown. > (==) Log file: "/home/pierre/.local/share/xorg/Xorg.0.log", Time: Tue Jun > 25 > 21:44:33 2019 > (==) Using system config directory "/usr/share/X11/xorg.conf.d" > (EE) > Fatal server error: > (EE) parse_vt_settings: Cannot open /dev/tty0 (Permission denied) > (EE) > (EE) > Please consult the The X.Org Foundation support > at http://wiki.x.org > for help. > (EE) Please also check the log file at > "/home/pierre/.local/share/xorg/Xorg.0.log" for additional information. > (EE) > (EE) Server terminated with error (1). Closing log file. > xinit: giving up > xinit: unable to connect to X server: Connection refused > xinit: server error > --- > > Two unusual things for me: > - it seems xorg-server runs as user, or at least not as root > - the log file is not the usual /var/log/Xorg.0.log (maybe because of the > authorization problem... > > I've checked the pam files, nothing obvious (I use pwquality for > passwords, > but I guess it has nothing to do with what is seen here. > > Do I need to add myself to a special group (wheel for example)? Wait! Check the build order. Was xorg protocol headers installed before elogind? >>> >>> For me, yes. >>> >>> Fri 07 Jun 2019 06:00:59 PM CDT >>> /usr/src/xc/prot-headers/xorgproto-2018.4.tar.bz2 >>> Sun 09 Jun 2019 11:16:29 AM CDT /usr/src/elogind/elogind-241.3.tar.gz >>> >>> -- Bruce >> Nope, sorry, it's not the headers, it's xtrans, so xorg-libs page. If xtrans >> isn't built with sd-daemon.h present, then the tty selection will be messed. >> It won't look to dbus (and polkit) for it's authorizations. So just rebuild >> xtrans, and then xorg-server without suid, just the wrapper. > > Did that, I do have /usr/include/elogind/systemd/sd-daemon.h > I did 'make clean' and then rebuilt/installed xtrans and xorg-server using the > elogind instructions. I still get a message that permission is denied when > trying to open virtual console 7. I just checked twm since it is the > simplest. > > When I pulled the patches after 241.1 was released with the >> journal->syslog compatibility stuff, I just copied the original page and >> forgot about the dependency. This will fix it, but I totally ruined Pierre's >> test run for the deps I think. Dang it! Pierre, can you run just blfs-tool >> without actually running the build to see how badly I messed up the >> ordering. Looking at Bruce's build, it looks like they were two days apart, >> but Bruce, correct me if I'm wrong, was running a manually scripted build. > > I have individual scripts for every package. I was looking at each one so the > test build was particularly time consuming. > > My full build log is at > http://anduin.linuxfromscratch.org/~bdubbs/files/packages-SVN-20190603-frodo85.log > so you can see exactly what I built and in what order, including a few > do-overs. > OK, tried rebuilding xorgproto, xtrans, then xorg-server. That's not enough... We have to fix it. Problem is, I must leave for a few days, and I cannot take the VM with me (I take a laptop, but I do not have enough disk space to add a 55Gb file on it...) What I'll do with the laptop is rebuilding just Xorg, and try with the new order (elogind just after shadow and before anything Xorg related). If it works, we'll have to think of the deps in the book... I have to travel first, so do not expect any result before tomorrow. Regards, Pierre -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] Xorg authorization problem with elogind
On 26/06/2019 04:15, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-dev wrote: > On 6/25/19 9:02 PM, DJ Lucas via blfs-dev wrote: >> >> >> On 6/25/2019 2:55 PM, Pierre Labastie via blfs-dev wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> I've not gone that far with my elogind testing: >>> - >>> pierre [ ~ ]$ startx >>> xauth: file /home/pierre/.serverauth.2289 does not exist >>> >>> >>> X.Org X Server 1.20.4 >>> X Protocol Version 11, Revision 0 >>> Build Operating System: Linux 5.1.14-lfs-1 x86_64 >>> Current Operating System: Linux turbolivirt 5.1.14-lfs-1 #1 SMP Tue Jun 25 >>> 18:58:17 CEST 2019 x86_64 >>> Kernel command line: BOOT_IMAGE=/vmlinuz-5.1.14-lfs-SVN-20190618 >>> root=/dev/sda2 ro quiet >>> Build Date: 24 June 2019 11:57:25AM >>> >>> Current version of pixman: 0.38.4 >>> Before reporting problems, check http://wiki.x.org >>> to make sure that you have the latest version. >>> Markers: (--) probed, (**) from config file, (==) default setting, >>> (++) from command line, (!!) notice, (II) informational, >>> (WW) warning, (EE) error, (NI) not implemented, (??) unknown. >>> (==) Log file: "/home/pierre/.local/share/xorg/Xorg.0.log", Time: Tue Jun 25 >>> 21:44:33 2019 >>> (==) Using system config directory "/usr/share/X11/xorg.conf.d" >>> (EE) >>> Fatal server error: >>> (EE) parse_vt_settings: Cannot open /dev/tty0 (Permission denied) >> Looks like both the sed to make it open the next available tty and the suid >> wrapper are missing. Did I do something incorrectly in the book here? I >> think Bruce had the same issue. I have not seen it locally. Also, make sure >> the createfiles is updated (also note that I am using Xorg-server-1.20.5 >> (same instructions). >> >> /tmp/.ICE-unix dir 1777 root root >> /tmp/.X11-unix dir 1777 root root >> >>> (EE) >>> (EE) >>> Please consult the The X.Org Foundation support >>> at http://wiki.x.org >>> for help. >>> (EE) Please also check the log file at >>> "/home/pierre/.local/share/xorg/Xorg.0.log" for additional information. >>> (EE) >> Again, the SUID wrapper should handle this. >>> (EE) Server terminated with error (1). Closing log file. >>> xinit: giving up >>> xinit: unable to connect to X server: Connection refused >>> xinit: server error >>> --- >>> >>> Two unusual things for me: >>> - it seems xorg-server runs as user, or at least not as root >>> - the log file is not the usual /var/log/Xorg.0.log (maybe because of the >>> authorization problem... >>> >>> I've checked the pam files, nothing obvious (I use pwquality for passwords, >>> but I guess it has nothing to do with what is seen here. >>> >>> Do I need to add myself to a special group (wheel for example)? > > What Doug and I did was add --enable-install-setuid to the xorg-server > instructions. That hasn't made it into the book yet, but it is needed. > > If already built, just run, as root, chmod u+s $XORG_PREFIX/libexec/Xorg Uh, wait a little... Normally this shouldn't be needed, unless elogind is not working. If DJ is right, the issue comes from xorgproto being built before elogind. Pierre -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] Xorg authorization problem with elogind
On 26/06/2019 04:08, DJ Lucas wrote: > > > On 6/25/2019 2:55 PM, Pierre Labastie via blfs-dev wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I've not gone that far with my elogind testing: >> - >> pierre [ ~ ]$ startx >> xauth: file /home/pierre/.serverauth.2289 does not exist >> >> >> X.Org X Server 1.20.4 >> X Protocol Version 11, Revision 0 >> Build Operating System: Linux 5.1.14-lfs-1 x86_64 >> Current Operating System: Linux turbolivirt 5.1.14-lfs-1 #1 SMP Tue Jun 25 >> 18:58:17 CEST 2019 x86_64 >> Kernel command line: BOOT_IMAGE=/vmlinuz-5.1.14-lfs-SVN-20190618 >> root=/dev/sda2 ro quiet >> Build Date: 24 June 2019 11:57:25AM >> >> Current version of pixman: 0.38.4 >> Before reporting problems, check http://wiki.x.org >> to make sure that you have the latest version. >> Markers: (--) probed, (**) from config file, (==) default setting, >> (++) from command line, (!!) notice, (II) informational, >> (WW) warning, (EE) error, (NI) not implemented, (??) unknown. >> (==) Log file: "/home/pierre/.local/share/xorg/Xorg.0.log", Time: Tue Jun 25 >> 21:44:33 2019 >> (==) Using system config directory "/usr/share/X11/xorg.conf.d" >> (EE) >> Fatal server error: >> (EE) parse_vt_settings: Cannot open /dev/tty0 (Permission denied) >> (EE) >> (EE) >> Please consult the The X.Org Foundation support >> at http://wiki.x.org >> for help. >> (EE) Please also check the log file at >> "/home/pierre/.local/share/xorg/Xorg.0.log" for additional information. >> (EE) >> (EE) Server terminated with error (1). Closing log file. >> xinit: giving up >> xinit: unable to connect to X server: Connection refused >> xinit: server error >> --- >> >> Two unusual things for me: >> - it seems xorg-server runs as user, or at least not as root >> - the log file is not the usual /var/log/Xorg.0.log (maybe because of the >> authorization problem... >> >> I've checked the pam files, nothing obvious (I use pwquality for passwords, >> but I guess it has nothing to do with what is seen here. >> >> Do I need to add myself to a special group (wheel for example)? > > Wait! Check the build order. Was xorg protocol headers installed before > elogind? yes! Actually, it all commes from the fact that polkit was not a 'role="runtime"' dependency of elogind. So the jhalfs dependency handler chose to build polkit before elogind (that was a circular dep, and jhalfs guessed the wrong order). I've now fixed the book, but for my build, I moved elogind just before polkit. Since polkit requires dbus, which recommends Xorg libraries, the Xorg libraries (and xorgproto) had been built before elogind. I just realized that I missed that dependency. The proto headers are > not correct for systemd/elogind if that's the case. The good news is that I > suspect that only the headers and xorg-server need to be reinstalled if that's > the case. I don't think anything else is dependent on it. Will try. Thanks Pierre -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] Since changes are coming...
Am Sonntag, den 23.06.2019, 17:55 -0400 schrieb Joe Locash via blfs- dev: > Is there any interest in adding MATE to BLFS? I have it working, just > tweaking the minor issues out. Due to change of my ISP, my answer to this thread gots lost in space. All of what I'd like to comment has been said in the meanwhile. Nevertheless, I'd like to resend my answer - see below. Joe, don't be frustrated. Its so much fun to do (B)LFS, with or without having the one or the other package in the book. See, I've managed to go thru BLFS based on a MultiLib-LFS (which is not "officially" supported, only available as a branch for those who knows that its there) upto having a running VirtualBox with running LFS as VMs :-). A good amount of packages required for that are not in the book. That said, just put together a text file with all the instructions to build MATE, post it here and we will see if we could take it over into the Wiki or store it at least as a hint. I think to support the situation that there are motivated contributors but we still lack on editor ressources, we should bring the wiki to a more prominent apperance. In my eyes, we have - "The Book" Actively maintained, verified and on checked stable versions. Thats where "official" (B)LFS is. - the Wiki refered to from existing pages, but otherwise hardly used - the Hints More or less "one-time" drop-ins for strange and esoteric matters What about if we could pull the Wiki more out of the background to have - "The Book" Actively maintained, verified and on checked stable versions. Thats where "official" (B)LFS is. - the Wiki refered to from existing pages, open for willing and authenticated users to put stuff in just like the book but without the need to be constantly verified and checked. Kind of "community area". Just pages like in the book, but not (neccessarily) under maintenance of the editors crew. Most of that is allready there, starting point is the http://wiki.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/wiki/BlfsNotes link. If the pages are well-formed and demands are there, it might be relativly easy to take content over to the Book. - the Hints More or less "one-time" drop-ins for strange and esoteric matters Thoughts? --orig msg-- Cool stuff! Problem is once MATE is added to the book, it needs to be maintained, not only for the next few months but for years. But maybe an editor raises his hand to take that task. Unfortunatly, there are not that many of them. If you have recorded the steps and packages to build, a hint or a wiki page would be great. In those pages it is not that dramatic if an outdated version is referenced. Its the logic of building which make live interesting ;-) -- Thomas -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
