Re: sh compliance problems
DJ Lucas wrote: > the > math early on in the following files is also broken with ash symlinked > to /bin/sh. hotplug-2004_09_23.tar.bz2, > /etc/hotplug/input.agent > /etc/hotplug/pci.agent > /etc/hotplug/pnp.rc > /etc/hotplug/usb.agent AFAICT, there is no easy way to do hexadecimal expansion in ashI don't think it's worth fixing. -- DJ Lucas -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Back from vacation
Hello guys. I'm back from vacation. A quick check of BZ and it looks like you guys have been doing a wonderful job. It will take a while to get back up on the issues, but at least I'll be reading mail every day. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: xi:include tags in the cross-lfs book
M.Canales.es wrote:
It failed on their current form. The xpointer expesions used aren't useful for
moving targets. That is the big issue: if there is a change on the nodes
position in the target file, the xpointers that point to that file wll be
wrong.
I think that the biggest trouble is that xpointer expressions include
some meaningless offset numbers like para[2] instead of assigning a
meaningful name to the exact text to be copied to another page.
Unfortunately, I am not familiar with XML at all, so all of the below is
pseudocode:
{mark name="some-warning"}{para}here goes a warning{/para}{/mark}
...
{reuse name="some-warning"/}
Is it possible to implement?
--
Alexander E. Patrakov
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
6.1 and Development "Acronyms and Terms" page
"SBU" is still referred to as "Static Binutils Unit". -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Hello and such :)
On Mon, Jul 04, 2005 at 09:10:20PM -0400, David Fix wrote: > > I've found some Cobalt RAQs that have been pretty cheap on eBay. :) Might > wanna take a look for 'em. :) NOOO :) Those things are pitifully slow. Not to mention things have to be done quite differently on mips boxes. -- Archaic Want control, education, and security from your operating system? Hardened Linux From Scratch http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/hlfs -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
RE: Hello and such :)
> Ah, so then we need to put out a call for a decent 1U server, eh? > Anyone? > > /me goes looking on ebay. I've found some Cobalt RAQs that have been pretty cheap on eBay. :) Might wanna take a look for 'em. :) Dave -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Hello and such :)
Gerard Beekmans wrote: precious physical space. At least with the LFS server's current 4U rack. If I can find a way to put the hardware in a 1U rackmount, there won't be an issue. I can squeeze it in anywhere and have LFS dedicated again. Ah, so then we need to put out a call for a decent 1U server, eh? Anyone? /me goes looking on ebay. -- JH -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: sh compliance problems
DJ Lucas wrote: > hotplug-2004_09_23.tar.bz2, old Or maybe not. Sorry. Problem still exists in most recent pre. -- DJ Lucas -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: pkg-config-0.18.1
David Jensen wrote: >They changed the name of the package. They also changed the library > directory name to /usr/lib/pkg-config. Most if not every package has a > hard coded pkgconfig. > From GTK2+ Makefile.am: > pkgconfigdir = $(libdir)/pkgconfig > >I suppose it is best to add /usr/lib/pkgconfig, and X116 and > opt/, until everyone is caught up. More likely, they will revert it. > > Any one have an opinion? I think I may change the bug to unassigned :-) > > -- > David Jensen > > Without digging into it too deep, I'd suggest to add the /usr/lib/pkgconfig -> ./pkg-config/ symlink. /usr/X11R6/ and /opt will not generally be affected, but the links would not hurt for the future if the name change does stick. -- DJ Lucas -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
sh compliance problems
mountkernfs script succeeds, however it leaves behind messages (merged) when sh is a symlink to ash. '&>' does not redirect. Suggest '2>&1>'. Also, I'm not sure what version of hotplug right this second, but the math early on in the following files is also broken with ash symlinked to /bin/sh. hotplug-2004_09_23.tar.bz2, old so I don't know if the problem still exists or not...any takers? /etc/hotplug/input.agent /etc/hotplug/pci.agent /etc/hotplug/pnp.rc /etc/hotplug/usb.agent All of the above works fine when sh is a symlink to zsh or bash (as expected). -- DJ Lucas -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Hello and such :)
On July 1, 2005 07:24 pm, Archaic wrote: > With a low nice value, then simultaneous wouldn't really hurt. Unless you got three processes running at the same time that are all trying to write to the same file at once. You can't, in that kind of scenario, be sure which file ends up being written last. It might be the first process, or the second, while we'd want the third one to be the "active" one. And if nothing else, it's ugly. We can do better programming than that. :) -- Gerard Beekmans /* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Hello and such :)
On July 2, 2005 11:16 am, Robert Connolly wrote: > Maybe someone knows a friendly isp who will adjust charges month to month > based on usage. Also, it would be a nice kick if the server was a legal > non-profit company, maybe some sort of charity, so that contributions could > be tax deductable (this would have to be reproduced in every country > involved, ie: canada and usa). Well as for the "friendly ISP" part, it doesn't get friendlier than this. I run the network of the ISP myself. I don't get charged for the bandwidth as long as it stays within reasonable limits. Even if I do let my boss charge me for the bandwidth usage, the bill would be half of what I pay right now. Unfortunately I am tight on rack space so I can't justify putting up my own server without reimbursing the company back for taking up that (sometimes) precious physical space. At least with the LFS server's current 4U rack. If I can find a way to put the hardware in a 1U rackmount, there won't be an issue. I can squeeze it in anywhere and have LFS dedicated again. For the time being I think I'll still it can be done the way I proposed. I did read your email Jeremy and part of me agrees with you that it might be a bad thing. Looking at the history of the LFS server as a whole, there haven't been any issues (security or otherwise) that have come up. One or two incidents do come to mind but those were born out of negligence on my part which simply isn't an issue in this setup. All things considered I think it'll work out at least temporarily until I can setup a dedicated server in a smaller formfactor. But I don't think we want to wait that long until that can be made so and at the same time be close to where I live. You guys may at this point think I have control issues. Well, I freely admit that I do when it comes to this stuff. I rather pay the extra few bucks than have the past server issues revisit us when somebody pulls the plug on us. -- Gerard Beekmans /* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: 6.1-pre1 recommends shadow 4.0.9, which seems missing
Matthew Burgess wrote: Kim McCall wrote: The 6.1-pre1 book's package list, http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/6.1-pre1/chapter03/packages.html recommends downloading Shadow (4.0.9) - 996 KB: ftp://ftp.pld.org.pl/software/shadow/ I'll add a note, similar to that for 'file' on the package download page. Added, and the gcc package size was updated too. Thanks again, Matt. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
pkg-config-0.18.1
They changed the name of the package. They also changed the library directory name to /usr/lib/pkg-config. Most if not every package has a hard coded pkgconfig. From GTK2+ Makefile.am: pkgconfigdir = $(libdir)/pkgconfig I suppose it is best to add /usr/lib/pkgconfig, and X116 and opt/, until everyone is caught up. More likely, they will revert it. Any one have an opinion? I think I may change the bug to unassigned :-) -- David Jensen -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: 6.1-pre1 recommends shadow 4.0.9, which seems missing
On Mon, Jul 04, 2005 at 10:53:50AM -0700, Kim McCall wrote: > > On a much more minor note, the recommended gcc package is listed as > GCC (3.4.3) - 17,714 KB: > but the only 3.4.3 tarball I could find describes itself as 26.2M in size. Working on it. Thanks for the report! -- Archaic Want control, education, and security from your operating system? Hardened Linux From Scratch http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/hlfs -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: xi:include tags in the cross-lfs book
El Lunes, 4 de Julio de 2005 22:05, Jim Gifford escribió: > I wouln't say it failed, I think we should just keep it architecure > specific. It failed on their current form. The xpointer expesions used aren't useful for moving targets. That is the big issue: if there is a change on the nodes position in the target file, the xpointers that point to that file wll be wrong. > Don't do includes from x86 in MIPS and sparc. I think this is what > Jermey is saying. I see another issue here: how can we know that some text in some file is xincluded into other file? Knowing that some block is xincluded into other(s) files, we will know that other file(s) must be revised after updating the affected block. -- Manuel Canales Esparcia Usuario de LFS nº2886: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org LFS en castellano: http://www.escomposlinux.org/lfs-es http://www.lfs-es.com TLDP-ES: http://es.tldp.org -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Failure when building /binutils (Chapter 5 on FC4 with gcc4)
Kim McCall wrote: The offending line of tc-i386.h reads: extern const struct relax_type md_relax_table[]; Is there a problem with trying to compile using the latest gcc, distributed with FC4? (I guess I missed the memo). Btw, yes, the current LFS book(s) will not work with gcc4. There needs to be several patches/updated commands to make it work. That's our next focus after we release version 6.1. -- JH -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Failure when building /binutils (Chapter 5 on FC4 with gcc4)
Kim McCall wrote: I tried to slavishly follow your directions. Nice adjectives! :) -- JH -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: xi:include tags in the cross-lfs book
M.Canales.es wrote: El Lunes, 4 de Julio de 2005 19:43, Jeremy Huntwork escribió: I'm not trying to be a stick in the mud here, and Manuel, I do appreciate all your good work and efforts to make things more fluid, but after trying to edit the new cross-lfs book several times and *still* getting lost and turned around and frustrated, I'd really like to see something different done. All that Xinclude stuff in the installation sections is an experiment, like the profile stuff in the multi-arch branch. Profiling was removed from cross-lfs due that it is a mess when more than 3-4 profiles are involved. Now look like the Xinclude experiment has failed also, at least when we try to Xinclude all possible text/command blocks. But also due that the current xpointers are based on the node absolute position, not on the actual content of the block that should be xincluded. Then, I will go to revert many of the Xinclude tags and try to use another xpointer approach (maybe based on IDs or other attribute) for the remaininig ones. And remember, if something don't work like was expected, it must be changed or removed, no matter how many time someone was invert doing it ;-) I wouln't say it failed, I think we should just keep it architecure specific. Don't do includes from x86 in MIPS and sparc. I think this is what Jermey is saying. -- -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] LFS User # 2577 Registered Linux User # 299986 -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: xi:include tags in the cross-lfs book
El Lunes, 4 de Julio de 2005 19:43, Jeremy Huntwork escribió: > I'm not trying to be a stick in the mud here, and Manuel, I do > appreciate all your good work and efforts to make things more fluid, but > after trying to edit the new cross-lfs book several times and *still* > getting lost and turned around and frustrated, I'd really like to see > something different done. All that Xinclude stuff in the installation sections is an experiment, like the profile stuff in the multi-arch branch. Profiling was removed from cross-lfs due that it is a mess when more than 3-4 profiles are involved. Now look like the Xinclude experiment has failed also, at least when we try to Xinclude all possible text/command blocks. But also due that the current xpointers are based on the node absolute position, not on the actual content of the block that should be xincluded. Then, I will go to revert many of the Xinclude tags and try to use another xpointer approach (maybe based on IDs or other attribute) for the remaininig ones. And remember, if something don't work like was expected, it must be changed or removed, no matter how many time someone was invert doing it ;-) -- Manuel Canales Esparcia Usuario de LFS nº2886: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org LFS en castellano: http://www.escomposlinux.org/lfs-es http://www.lfs-es.com TLDP-ES: http://es.tldp.org -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Failure when building /binutils (Chapter 5 on FC4 with gcc4)
Tobias Lieber wrote: The best place to look for gcc4 patches is fedora cvs (http://cvs.fedora.redhat.com/viewcvs/devel/) From Andrew -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Failure when building /binutils (Chapter 5 on FC4 with gcc4)
erm... this will be not the last error you will receiv. the hardest package is glibc. Needed several patches, but i foudn them all via google. They were all from a RH mailinglist or so... have a lot of fun Tobias Lieber > > Hi > i just compiled a LFS with gcc 4 > > i had the same problem. I solved it by removing this -Wstrict-prototypes > -Wmissing-prototypes in the Makefile > > this should help > > Tobias Lieber > > > > > > I tried to slavishly follow your directions. > > > > I was doing the initial compile of binutils. > > Everything went swimmingly for 105 seconds, then I got: > > make[3]: Entering directory `/mnt/lfs/sources/binutils-build/gas' > > gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I../../binutils-2.15.94.0.2.2/gas -I. > > -D_GNU_SOURCE -I. -I../../binutils-2.15.94.0.2.2/gas -I../bfd > > -I../../binutils-2.15.94.0.2.2/gas/config > > -I../../binutils-2.15.94.0.2.2/gas/../include > > -I../../binutils-2.15.94.0.2.2/gas/.. > > -I../../binutils-2.15.94.0.2.2/gas/../bfd > > -I../../binutils-2.15.94.0.2.2/gas/../intl -I../intl > > -DLOCALEDIR="\"/tools/share/locale\"" -W -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes > > -Wmissing-prototypes -g -O2 -c ../../binutils-2.15.94.0.2.2/gas/app.c > > In file included from ./targ-cpu.h:1, > > from ../../binutils-2.15.94.0.2.2/gas/config/obj-elf.h:42, > > from ./obj-format.h:1, > > from ../../binutils-2.15.94.0.2.2/gas/config/te-linux.h:4, > > from ./targ-env.h:1, > > from ../../binutils-2.15.94.0.2.2/gas/as.h:625, > > from ../../binutils-2.15.94.0.2.2/gas/app.c:30: > > ../../binutils-2.15.94.0.2.2/gas/config/tc-i386.h:443: error: array > > type has incomplete element type > > make[3]: *** [app.o] Error 1 > > make[3]: Leaving directory `/mnt/lfs/sources/binutils-build/gas' > > make[2]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 > > make[2]: Leaving directory `/mnt/lfs/sources/binutils-build/gas' > > make[1]: *** [all] Error 2 > > make[1]: Leaving directory `/mnt/lfs/sources/binutils-build/gas' > > make: *** [all-gas] Error 2 > > > > The offending line of tc-i386.h reads: > > extern const struct relax_type md_relax_table[]; > > > > Is there a problem with trying to compile using the latest gcc, > > distributed with FC4? (I guess I missed the memo). > > > > Thanks, > > Kim > > -- > > http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev > > FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ > > Unsubscribe: See the above information page > > > -- > http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev > FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ > Unsubscribe: See the above information page > -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Failure when building /binutils (Chapter 5 on FC4 with gcc4)
Hi i just compiled a LFS with gcc 4 i had the same problem. I solved it by removing this -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes in the Makefile this should help Tobias Lieber > > I tried to slavishly follow your directions. > > I was doing the initial compile of binutils. > Everything went swimmingly for 105 seconds, then I got: > make[3]: Entering directory `/mnt/lfs/sources/binutils-build/gas' > gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I../../binutils-2.15.94.0.2.2/gas -I. > -D_GNU_SOURCE -I. -I../../binutils-2.15.94.0.2.2/gas -I../bfd > -I../../binutils-2.15.94.0.2.2/gas/config > -I../../binutils-2.15.94.0.2.2/gas/../include > -I../../binutils-2.15.94.0.2.2/gas/.. > -I../../binutils-2.15.94.0.2.2/gas/../bfd > -I../../binutils-2.15.94.0.2.2/gas/../intl -I../intl > -DLOCALEDIR="\"/tools/share/locale\"" -W -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes > -Wmissing-prototypes -g -O2 -c ../../binutils-2.15.94.0.2.2/gas/app.c > In file included from ./targ-cpu.h:1, > from ../../binutils-2.15.94.0.2.2/gas/config/obj-elf.h:42, > from ./obj-format.h:1, > from ../../binutils-2.15.94.0.2.2/gas/config/te-linux.h:4, > from ./targ-env.h:1, > from ../../binutils-2.15.94.0.2.2/gas/as.h:625, > from ../../binutils-2.15.94.0.2.2/gas/app.c:30: > ../../binutils-2.15.94.0.2.2/gas/config/tc-i386.h:443: error: array > type has incomplete element type > make[3]: *** [app.o] Error 1 > make[3]: Leaving directory `/mnt/lfs/sources/binutils-build/gas' > make[2]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 > make[2]: Leaving directory `/mnt/lfs/sources/binutils-build/gas' > make[1]: *** [all] Error 2 > make[1]: Leaving directory `/mnt/lfs/sources/binutils-build/gas' > make: *** [all-gas] Error 2 > > The offending line of tc-i386.h reads: > extern const struct relax_type md_relax_table[]; > > Is there a problem with trying to compile using the latest gcc, > distributed with FC4? (I guess I missed the memo). > > Thanks, > Kim > -- > http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev > FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ > Unsubscribe: See the above information page > -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Failure when building /binutils (Chapter 5 on FC4 with gcc4)
I tried to slavishly follow your directions. I was doing the initial compile of binutils. Everything went swimmingly for 105 seconds, then I got: make[3]: Entering directory `/mnt/lfs/sources/binutils-build/gas' gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I../../binutils-2.15.94.0.2.2/gas -I. -D_GNU_SOURCE -I. -I../../binutils-2.15.94.0.2.2/gas -I../bfd -I../../binutils-2.15.94.0.2.2/gas/config -I../../binutils-2.15.94.0.2.2/gas/../include -I../../binutils-2.15.94.0.2.2/gas/.. -I../../binutils-2.15.94.0.2.2/gas/../bfd -I../../binutils-2.15.94.0.2.2/gas/../intl -I../intl -DLOCALEDIR="\"/tools/share/locale\"" -W -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -g -O2 -c ../../binutils-2.15.94.0.2.2/gas/app.c In file included from ./targ-cpu.h:1, from ../../binutils-2.15.94.0.2.2/gas/config/obj-elf.h:42, from ./obj-format.h:1, from ../../binutils-2.15.94.0.2.2/gas/config/te-linux.h:4, from ./targ-env.h:1, from ../../binutils-2.15.94.0.2.2/gas/as.h:625, from ../../binutils-2.15.94.0.2.2/gas/app.c:30: ../../binutils-2.15.94.0.2.2/gas/config/tc-i386.h:443: error: array type has incomplete element type make[3]: *** [app.o] Error 1 make[3]: Leaving directory `/mnt/lfs/sources/binutils-build/gas' make[2]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1 make[2]: Leaving directory `/mnt/lfs/sources/binutils-build/gas' make[1]: *** [all] Error 2 make[1]: Leaving directory `/mnt/lfs/sources/binutils-build/gas' make: *** [all-gas] Error 2 The offending line of tc-i386.h reads: extern const struct relax_type md_relax_table[]; Is there a problem with trying to compile using the latest gcc, distributed with FC4? (I guess I missed the memo). Thanks, Kim -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: 6.1-pre1 recommends shadow 4.0.9, which seems missing
Kim McCall wrote: The 6.1-pre1 book's package list, http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/6.1-pre1/chapter03/packages.html recommends downloading Shadow (4.0.9) - 996 KB: ftp://ftp.pld.org.pl/software/shadow/ Yes, they, along with the 'file' maintainers insist on moving old versions out of the top-level directory. You can get 4.0.9 from ftp://ftp.pld.org.pl/software/shadow/old/ I'll add a note, similar to that for 'file' on the package download page. Thanks for the report, Matt. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
6.1-pre1 recommends shadow 4.0.9, which seems missing
The 6.1-pre1 book's package list, http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/6.1-pre1/chapter03/packages.html recommends downloading Shadow (4.0.9) - 996 KB: ftp://ftp.pld.org.pl/software/shadow/ but ftp://ftp.pld.org.pl/software/shadow/ lists only shadow-4.0.10.tar.bz2 1021 KB 06/28/2004 04:03:00 PM shadow-4.0.10.tar.gz1582 KB 06/28/2004 04:03:00 PM shadow-4.0.9-4.0.10.patch.bz2 265 KB 06/28/2004 04:03:00 PM shadow-4.0.9-4.0.10.patch.gz497 KB 06/28/2004 04:03:00 PM This seems like an error to me (an admitted neophyte). Thought you might want to take a look. On a much more minor note, the recommended gcc package is listed as GCC (3.4.3) - 17,714 KB: but the only 3.4.3 tarball I could find describes itself as 26.2M in size. Thought you'd be interested, Kim -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
xi:include tags in the cross-lfs book
Hi All, For the record, I'd like to suggest that we remove the many extra xi:include tags for text and commands within the cross-lfs book. Far from simplifying the process of editing the book, IMHO, it has made it 10 times harder. I can't see a thing clearly when I go in there. It's like a maze to try to find out what is being pulled from where and why, and in many cases it just makes no sense to include what we're including. Here's a prime example. Right now, the glibc-64-bit xml page for the final-system in the sparc64 book pulls instructions from the mips book at that same section: xi:include xmlns:xi="http://www.w3.org/2003/XInclude"; href="../mips64/glibc.xml" xpointer="xpointer(//[EMAIL PROTECTED]'installation']/para[2])" xi:include xmlns:xi="http://www.w3.org/2003/XInclude"; href="../mips64/glibc.xml" xpointer="xpointer(//[EMAIL PROTECTED]'installation']/para[3])" To me, this is simply ridiculous. Why do we want to pull Mips-specific information into a sparc-specific book? What's more, in this particular case, the text and commands it adds there are currently wrong. Because the sparc book would currently have us *not* add glibc-linuxthreads (which is needed for sparc) and patch glibc with a mips-specific patch. The current setup is just as much (if not more) work as before, because now when something changes we have to go find all pages that reference that page (which could be who knows how many) and make sure that something that wasn't supposed to have changed didn't. I *highly* suggest that we go back to the last setup we had: common [General instructions that all books have - if you *must* use xi:include it should pull from here ] multilib [ Same as common but for 64-bit/multilib books only ] arch-specific [ ie, sparc64, ppc, x86, whatever ] I'm not trying to be a stick in the mud here, and Manuel, I do appreciate all your good work and efforts to make things more fluid, but after trying to edit the new cross-lfs book several times and *still* getting lost and turned around and frustrated, I'd really like to see something different done. -- JH -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
patch configure command
Looking over my buildscripts, I noticed I don't use CPPFLAGS=-D_GNU_SOURCE in patch. Those build scripts have produced a working patch binary on PPC, so it may no longer be necessary. I'm not at my mac to double check that there weren't any edits done to a local copy of the script, but can any mac users out there try to build patch with out that envar? When I get a chance to log into the mac, I'll run some tests. -- Archaic Want control, education, and security from your operating system? Hardened Linux From Scratch http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/hlfs -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: lfs breaks
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Developers, I am working on an up to date Fedora core 3 sytem. I have been trying to build LFS-6.1.*etc and have repeated failures when I get to tcl8.4.9-src.tar.gz. Each time I try to build it fails on this error: ./../compat/strstr.c : In function `strstr': ./../compat/strstr.c : 67 `NULL' undeclared (first use in this function) Is this just my system or have other people experienced this. Odd that is building this standard C library function. try: export CFLAGS=-I/tools/include ./configure --prefix=/tools make unset CFLAGS or maybe just: unset CFLAGS maybe -- David Jensen -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
lfs breaks
Hi Developers, I am working on an up to date Fedora core 3 sytem. I have been trying to build LFS-6.1.*etc and have repeated failures when I get to tcl8.4.9-src.tar.gz. Each time I try to build it fails on this error: ./../compat/strstr.c : In function `strstr': ./../compat/strstr.c : 67 `NULL' undeclared (first use in this function) Is this just my system or have other people experienced this. Regards Ross Maggs. __ Look What The New Netscape.com Can Do! Now you can preview dozens of stories and have the ones you select delivered to you without ever leaving the Top Home Page. And the new Tool Box gives you one click access to local Movie times, Maps, White Pages and more. See for yourself at http://netcenter.netscape.com/netcenter/ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
