Re: [blfs-dev] SVN-20141225 lfs hibernate revisited
On 31/12/14 10:53, Christopher Gregory wrote: Hello, Well as this is now the TRUNK SVN-20141225 LFS build, ie systemV that I have installed is the reason for the new posting to the list. I have no idea *what* has changed, but I have just built the system using jhalf and have only installed linux-pam, openssl, gpm, python 2.7.9 and a couple of others. I just installed pm-utils following the instructions from trunk version of the book, and I find that pm-hibernate does exactly the same that it did when I tested it on systemd. It goes through and creates the image, powers down and then totally ignores it when the laptop power button is turned on again. I have not modified the config files from the default, I do not have Upower installed and I have not install acpid. Could this really be an issue with my laptop? I am picking that if I downgrade the kernel and patch it like I did on systemd that pm-hibernate will work correctly. With this it really needs someone who has just installed this version to test it. I am at a total loss. Something has to have changed, be it in the kernel code or some other library. Kernel rebuilt at 3.18.1, with no problems with resume or hibernate (via xfce/consolekit). Are you sure you've formatted your swap partition as a Linux Swap Partition? ISTR, the Kernel doesn't like it if you try to use an ordinary partition. Also, you've presumably had a look at /var/log/pm-suspend.log, to check that the 'hibernate' part worked OK. David -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] firefox-33.0.3 build with enable-optimize: error and no error {Was: ... seamonkey]
On 08/11/14 12:07, Fernando de Oliveira wrote: Subject is seamonkey, but error is in *firefox-33.0.3*. Parts of build log attached. Left configuration and install parts. Optimization error starts at line 571, key word is Executing at the beginning of line (search ^Executing). Your (Bruce, who asked, and anybody else, please) help is much appreciated. I will start by comparing python versions in the two systems: LFS7.1 host (SVN-20120311) (error occurs) LFS7.6 (no error with enable-optimize The following relates specifically to Firefox 32.0.1 (and Seamonkey 2.29), but may well still apply to 33.0.3. There is apparently a gcc compiler issue causing the Python script, 'packager.py' to fail while it is precompiling a list of Javascript scripts, using Mozilla's (internal) js shell, 'xpcshell' - essentially, it (i.e. xpcshell) falls over about half way through the list, as your log demonstrates. Now as I understand it, for gcc 4.9.x, certain 'undefined' behaviour has been changed, in particular, the handling (signed) integer overflow, so that any program that was tacitly relying on a certain behaviour will have problems, which could very well be what is happening here (i.e. some counter is overflowing). See: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1047803 for some discussion. (In other words, it is a gcc problem, not a Python problem) Using ac_add_options --enable-optimize=-O2 (rather than --disable-optimize), appears to cure the problem for both packages. David -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] Remotely mounting drive via lan
On 25/10/14 03:08, Christopher Gregory wrote: The server has two internal hard drives. One is an IDE and one is a sata. The processor is an AMD athlon 64bit duel core. What I wanted to do is like I did on my laptop, which is mount the bare drive, which in this case would be the ide as the sata has windows installed on it. Would I still need to have a 64bit environment setup on my laptop to support running jhalfs on a native 64bit remote machine? I'm sure you know this already, but you can perfectly well install a 32-bit system on the machine. For example, I myself have a dual-core 64-bit Athlone, and run 32-bit LFS (and 64-bit OpenSUSE 13.1). Is there any particular reason it has to be 64-bit? I have built 32-bit partly in order to run one or two of my favourite Windows programs (e.g. Irfan View) under Wine - perhaps your landlord would like to do the same. I'd also echo the comments about leaving your landlord with an LFS system, especially from the point of view of security upgrades. It's just so much easier with a distribution like OpenSUSE or Debian or whatever to upgrade pretty much automatically when something like Bashbug or Heartbleed comes along - is your landlord going to be able to do that? Also, the system will need that much more attention to security because it is being used by multiple people than a stand-alone desktop system. David -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] A couple of gnome packages now seem redundent.
On 02/10/14 23:41, Fernando de Oliveira wrote: Modified Thunar and xfce4-settings dependencies at revision 14465. Please, check if it is OK. Looks good to me. Actually, looking through my notes, I have another small quibble with Thunar, which is that it seems to require gvfs for remote browsing and automounting; the book only has gvfs as a rec dep for thunar-volman. David -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] A couple of gnome packages now seem redundent.
On 03/10/14 12:31, Fernando de Oliveira wrote: On 03-10-2014 04:49, David Brodie wrote: On 02/10/14 23:41, Fernando de Oliveira wrote: Modified Thunar and xfce4-settings dependencies at revision 14465. Please, check if it is OK. Looks good to me. Actually, looking through my notes, I have another small quibble with Thunar, which is that it seems to require gvfs for remote browsing and automounting; the book only has gvfs as a rec dep for thunar-volman. Thanks. Included gvfs as runtime. Please, check if it is OK. Hi, I've rechecked with gvfs installed and not-installed (and with thunar-volman uninstalled), and get the same results as before. Not sure I'd call it a required dep for Thunar itself, though, since it only impacts two discrete areas of functionality, and the rest of the package works fine without it, AFAICS. David -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] A couple of gnome packages now seem redundent.
On 02/10/14 11:20, Fernando de Oliveira wrote: On 01-10-2014 19:25, Christopher Gregory wrote: Hello, When I was installing this new version of gnome ie 3.0.14 I noticed that when building evince that it complained that ADWAITA_ICON_THEME was not present whereas in the past it required gnome-icon-theme. Yes, trunk has already included adwaita-icon-theme-3.14.0 (09/28/14 13:19:18 r14415) and removed gnome-icon-theme from evince (10/01/14 09:34:20 r14448) I think that at lease gnome-icon-theme can be archived but I am not entirely sure. The April announcement can be viewed at: http://worldofgnome.org/welcome-the-new-gnomes-official-icon-set-adwaita/ I think these can be archived: gnome-icon-theme-3.12.0 gnome-icon-theme-extras-3.12.0 gnome-icon-theme-symbolic-3.12.0 But will wait for your results. Hi, gnome-system-monitor 3.12.2 requires both gnome-icon-theme and (not mentioned in the book) gnome-icon-theme-symbolic (although perhaps they are dropped for g-s-m 3.14.0). Also, I believe Thunar 1.6.3 requires gnome-icon-theme, according to my notes (also not mentioned in the book). These are the two in the current SVN book that I am aware of. David -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] A couple of gnome packages now seem redundent.
On 02/10/14 17:14, Fernando de Oliveira wrote:
Thanks, David. Very important, I needed to modify some packages.
I found:
gnome-system-monitor-3.14.0/ChangeLog: Drop gnome-icon-theme dependency
Fair enough.
Thunar 1.6.3:
{{{
commit 8f7a02c162880e48891ea5528e3513d71ef6105f
Author: Jannis Pohlmann jan...@xfce.org
Date: Wed Jan 26 23:17:18 2011 +0100
Ship stock_folder-{copy,move}.png with Thunar itself (bug #6851).
These icons were part of older gnome-icon-theme releases but have now
disappeared. There are no useful equivalents in the icon naming
specification or the GTK+ stock icons (well, there is GTK_STOCK_COPY,
but no appropriate replacement for stock_folder-move), so for now
it's
best to ship the icons ourselves, I think.
}}}
I think Thunar still has a run-time dependency on gnome-icon-theme -
it's just not checked for in the configure script. For example, try
renaming /usr/share/icons/gnome and then trying to view a folder as
icons. Jannis's commit message seems to be about replacing some icons
which *used* to be in g-i-t with his own copies, not about dropping
g-i-t altogether. (At least, that's how I read it.)
David
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] A couple of gnome packages now seem redundent.
On 02/10/14 18:26, Armin K. wrote: On 10/02/2014 07:11 PM, David Brodie wrote: I think Thunar still has a run-time dependency on gnome-icon-theme - it's just not checked for in the configure script. For example, try renaming /usr/share/icons/gnome and then trying to view a folder as icons. Jannis's commit message seems to be about replacing some icons which *used* to be in g-i-t with his own copies, not about dropping g-i-t altogether. (At least, that's how I read it.) David I suppose it could use any icon theme that has a similar icon set, be it gnome, adwaita, oxygen, etc icon theme. I remember using tango-icon-theme with Xfce4 in the past too. OK, I've just repeated my test with adwaita installed, with the same results, i.e. Thunar is missing icons if it can't find gnome-icon-theme - also, xfce-settings is missing some icons, which I hadn't noticed before. If Thunar (and xfce-settings) are OK with tango or oxygen, then perhaps adwaita is the problem, e.g. it is not compatible with gtk+2. David -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] tcl8.6.2
On 15/09/14 00:45, Christopher Gregory wrote: On Mon, September 15, 2014 3:34 am, Fernando de Oliveira wrote: For some reason, just came across your messages, Christopher, and Wayne's about Seahorse. Sorry about that. I think that the reason is I was focused in modifying the book and this persistent headache. Christopher, do you want to discuss what I've done in the book today? I could not anymore think very much about your messages (headache), but from what I saw, I did more or less what you where suggesting. Anyway, if you want, I will try to reply today, or, if I need to think much, will reply tomorrow. -- []s, Fernando -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page Hello Fernando, There is nothing anyone can do about delays in emial being either sent or recieved. I thought that was the case for you having not replied. I only did a quick look through tcl so that I could offer a few suggestions that you may not have known. I did discover on the tcl website (at least I think it was their website) that they stated that their build script is mearly a wrapper to call in the bundled software. They do not modify the included packages from the originals. It may well be that if we do a similar thing with the other packages that they bundle along with the seds you have modified from arch that the warnings and hard coded links are removed. You have done a far more extensive investigation on it than I have. My only real question is, should the changes you have made to the sqlite instrctions be optional? Prior to this the bundled pakages for tcl were not. I do not know if sqlite integration is considered mandatory for the functionality of tcl or not. Maybe Bruce could also have some input on this as I am only trying to come to grasps with it in my own mind. I would much rather go with the majority on things rather than perhaps wrongly thinking that my way of thinking is the correct one. It is just a shame that this issue cropped up during the release cycle, as if it is decided to go ahead and split out the other bundled packages, it will require quite a bit more work on the tcl page. At least we do not have to create seperate pages for them, but rather just put additional lines of build instructions for them. My main concern with that approach is, will it actually make the build instructions too long? If it did make them look to long then it would be more work creating seperate pages for the bunled packages that are not already in the book. Regards, Christopher. Fernando and Christopher: From configure.in in ./pkgs/sqlite3.8.6/configure.in : # # The --with-system-sqlite causes the TCL bindings to SQLite to use # the system shared library for SQLite rather than statically linking # against its own private copy. This is dangerous and leads to # undersirable dependences and is not recommended. # Patchs from rmax. # I note that it also sets a slightly different set of flags for sqlite: Our flags: -DSQLITE_ENABLE_FTS3=1 \ -DSQLITE_ENABLE_COLUMN_METADATA=1 \ -DSQLITE_ENABLE_UNLOCK_NOTIFY=1\ -DSQLITE_SECURE_DELETE=1\ Tcl's flags: TEA_ADD_CFLAGS([-DSQLITE_ENABLE_FTS3=1]) TEA_ADD_CFLAGS([-DSQLITE_3_SUFFIX_ONLY=1]) TEA_ADD_CFLAGS([-DSQLITE_ENABLE_RTREE=1]) TEA_ADD_CFLAGS([-DSQLITE_OMIT_DEPRECATED=1]) So for both these reasons, it would seem sensible to go with the standard TCL build method, and compile and link sqlite statically. David -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] tcl8.6.2
On 15/09/14 14:53, Christopher Gregory wrote: Hello David, You are basing this on reading one file. Have you actually read their website with regards to the build process? Do you have any security related website that backs up your claims? I HAVE read their site and most definately a system sql can be used, as is being done in other distros. I'll reply to the list, hope you don't mind. No, I haven't done the research you suggested, however, I don't see that the benefit of dynamically linking sqlite outweighs the possible risks (whatever they are) that we are warned about by upstream. (IOW, I'm taking the path of least resistance). David -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] install-tl-unx : final change to support scripts which read xml ?
On 08/09/14 09:16, Pierre Labastie wrote:
Second, even if a version were added to the title, since the installation
process is interactive, installation cannot be automated anyway.
I'm not volunteering, but it's reasonably straightforward to automate
interactive installs with 'expect', for example, this is a script which
I wrote for a binary install of the Free Pascal compiler (with unquoted
EOF so I can substitute $install_dir):
cat expect.$$$ EOF
set timeout -1 ;
spawn bash install.sh
expect {
Install prefix { exp_send $install_dir\r ; exp_continue }
Install Textmode IDE { exp_send y\r ; exp_continue }
Install FCL { exp_send y\r ; exp_continue }
Install packages { exp_send y\r ; exp_continue }
Install documentation { exp_send y\r ; exp_continue }
Install demos { exp_send y\r ; exp_continue }
Install demos in { exp_send \r ; exp_continue }
eof
}
EOF
and to run it is simply:
expect expect.$$$
or alternatively you can do it all on the expect command line, e.g. for
the Android SDK (not the latest version):
expect -c '
set timeout -1 ;
spawn tools/android update sdk --no-ui --no-https \
--filter
platform-tools,build-tools-19.0.1,android-19,extra-android-support;
expect {
Do you accept the license { exp_send y\r ; exp_continue }
eof
}
'
(Without missing the final single quote)
David
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
[blfs-dev] giflib and xmlto
Hi I think there is a possible problem with xmlto-0.0.26 in respect of the giflib-5.1.0 installation in the current development version: if xmlto is installed, then the giflib build system will try to rebuild its documentation, using the xmlto script, but the latter fails, as xmlto can't find local copies of the relevant version of the docbook schema (namely 4.1.2), and the command-line for both xmllint and xsltproc specify the switch '--nonet', so it is unable to download the remote versions as specified in the docbook catalog. I've also had the same problem with alsa-utils-1.0.28, in this case, relating to docbook 4.2, although with alsa-utils, the doc generation can be disabled with the --disable-xmlto configure switch. The solution I've used is to change the xmlto script itself, with the following (at pre-configure stage): sed -i s/--nonet// xmlto.in Has anybody else had the same problem, and should this fix be considered for inclusion? Regards, David -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-dev] giflib and xmlto
On 07/08/14 15:11, Armin K. wrote: On 08/07/2014 03:50 PM, David Brodie wrote: Hi I think there is a possible problem with xmlto-0.0.26 in respect of the giflib-5.1.0 installation in the current development version: if xmlto is installed, then the giflib build system will try to rebuild its documentation, using the xmlto script, but the latter fails, as xmlto can't find local copies of the relevant version of the docbook schema (namely 4.1.2), and the command-line for both xmllint and xsltproc specify the switch '--nonet', so it is unable to download the remote versions as specified in the docbook catalog. I've also had the same problem with alsa-utils-1.0.28, in this case, relating to docbook 4.2, although with alsa-utils, the doc generation can be disabled with the --disable-xmlto configure switch. The solution I've used is to change the xmlto script itself, with the following (at pre-configure stage): sed -i s/--nonet// xmlto.in Has anybody else had the same problem, and should this fix be considered for inclusion? Regards, David http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/pipermail/blfs-support/2014-August/075332.html You are having the same problem. You missed one of the configuration parts in docbook-xml. Yes, a problem with my build script. Apologies for the noise. David -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
[blfs-dev] Lynx 2.8.8 in BLFS 7.5 - silent version change?
Hi The file I have just downloaded today has failed a checksum test, the actual checksum being as follows: md5sum lynx2.8.8.tar.bz2 b231c2aa34dfe7ca25681ef4e55ee7e8 lynx2.8.8.tar.bz2 rather than f467c043fe9a3963fc1c05f54923803f as stated in the BLFS 7.5 book. Further investigation reveals that the CHANGES file in the source root folder states that the current version is now 2014-03-09 (2.8.8rel.2) (currently the version in the Development Book), rather than the original release. The download location is still http://lynx.isc.org/lynx2.8.8/lynx2.8.8.tar.bz2 (or the same as ftp:) David -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
