Re: GCC4 Build Issue
Greg Schafer wrote: Matthew Burgess wrote: I assume they've fixed all the problems with -fomit-frame-pointer? What problems? I can't remember definitive examples, I'm afraid. I just know that some software either didn't compile or demonstrated erratic behaviour with that flag specified. But that is orthogonal to this discussion anyway. The GCC devs believe that compiling GCC-4.x itself with the switch is desired. Yep, understood. I just saw -fomit-frame-pointer in your original message and the alarm bells automatically triggered :) And just a reminder, this applies only to x86! Well, that's OK...LFS only applies to x86 :) (officially, and if we're not talking cross-lfs/multi-arch of course!). Cheers, Matt. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Issue with PCH and 2.6.12 kernel
Greg Schafer wrote: Here is the final patch as committed: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2005-08/msg00052.html Thanks Greg. Looks like we'll backport that patch to 3.4.4. 3.4.5 still has 115 regressions (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20003), so I don't think shifting to a snapshot is appropriate for the stable LFS book. GCC-4.0.x is a way off on the roadmap (what roadmap? Ah yeah, the one I'll have to get online some time!). Cheers, Matt. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Upcoming util-linux
Just a heads up - util-linux 2.13 will remove several items, as per the following changelog entry for pre1 Changes: GNU autoconf/automake/libtool are now used for building. schedutils were added. Support for curses implementations other than ncurses was removed. The arch, passwd, rescuept, and setfdprm programs were removed. mkminix-0.1/ was removed. Misc fixes and documentation updates were made. A translation was added for the vi locale. The translations for the ca, de, fi, fr, it, nl, ru, and tr locales were updated. This may impact some apps that use arch in their configure stage (I know at least perl used arch at some stage) -- - Steve Crosby -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Upcoming util-linux
On Wed, 3 Aug 2005, steve crosby wrote: Just a heads up - util-linux 2.13 will remove several items, as per the following changelog entry for pre1 Changes: GNU autoconf/automake/libtool are now used for building. schedutils were added. Support for curses implementations other than ncurses was removed. The arch, passwd, rescuept, and setfdprm programs were removed. mkminix-0.1/ was removed. Misc fixes and documentation updates were made. A translation was added for the vi locale. The translations for the ca, de, fi, fr, it, nl, ru, and tr locales were updated. This may impact some apps that use arch in their configure stage (I know at least perl used arch at some stage) Thanks for the heads-up Steve. I know my scripts use arch to decide on architecture-specific variations, but a quick look at the man page says it's equivalent to 'uname -m' so shouldn't be a big deal anywhere. Ken -- das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Upcoming util-linux
On Wed, Aug 03, 2005 at 12:46:15PM +0100, Ken Moffat wrote: Thanks for the heads-up Steve. I know my scripts use arch to decide on architecture-specific variations, but a quick look at the man page says it's equivalent to 'uname -m' so shouldn't be a big deal anywhere. And if need be, a wrapper named arch that calls uname -m could be created. I guess it just depends on how much stuff breaks with arch missing. -- 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: Upcoming util-linux
On Wed, Aug 03, 2005 at 10:54:34PM +1200, steve crosby wrote: Just a heads up - util-linux 2.13 will remove several items, as per the following changelog entry for pre1 Thanks, Steve. It's been BZ'd. -- 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
Suggestion for Vim instructions
Hi all, Just a suggestion for the Vim instructions. Discuss, disregard or whatever! A symlink from /usr/share/doc to the docs stashed away in /usr/share/vim/vim63/doc would be nice. I like it when the docs are located in a spot where you can find them. :-) ln -v -s ../vim/vim63/doc /usr/share/doc/vim-6.3 would do the trick. -- Randy rmlscsi: [GNU ld version 2.15.94.0.2 20041220] [gcc (GCC) 3.4.3] [GNU C Library stable release version 2.3.4] [Linux 2.6.10 i686] 11:41:01 up 123 days, 11:14, 2 users, load average: 0.24, 0.06, 0.14 -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: mozilla and enigmail
stirling wrote these words on 08/02/05 23:48 CST: enigmail and ipc need version bumps in the mozilla instructions to be consistent with the versions used for thunderbird: enigmail-0.92.0 ipc-1.1.3 Indeed. Mozdev shows these versions to be used with Mozilla-1.7.x This almost seems something that should be fixed for the 6.1 release. Thoughts from others? If there is positive feedback, I'll BZ this and let Bruce make a decision when he returns. -- Randy rmlscsi: [GNU ld version 2.15.94.0.2 20041220] [gcc (GCC) 3.4.3] [GNU C Library stable release version 2.3.4] [Linux 2.6.10 i686] 11:51:01 up 123 days, 11:24, 2 users, load average: 0.43, 0.17, 0.13 -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Suggestion for Vim instructions
Archaic wrote these words on 08/03/05 13:51 CST: On Wed, Aug 03, 2005 at 11:45:37AM -0500, Randy McMurchy wrote: A symlink from /usr/share/doc to the docs stashed away in /usr/share/vim/vim63/doc would be nice. I like it when the docs are located in a spot where you can find them. :-) I like the idea of a /usr/share/doc/vim-6.3, but would it be better to just make vim install the docs there? Obviously it wouldn't be easier, but /usr/share/doc is currently free of symlinks (at least with what I build). Just a thought. Yes, that would be better. I wonder how much trouble it is to point just the docs of /usr/share/vim/vim63 over to /usr/share/doc. There is a whole bunch of stuff installed in /usr/share/vim/vim63 other than the docs. Along these lines, on one of my fairly heavily loaded systems, I have nothing but directories in /usr/share/doc, expect for the sed.html file stuck in there. Perhaps the sed instructions could be modified to put the *one* file it installs into a /usr/share/doc/sed-4.1.4 directory? -- Randy rmlscsi: [GNU ld version 2.15.94.0.2 20041220] [gcc (GCC) 3.4.3] [GNU C Library stable release version 2.3.4] [Linux 2.6.10 i686] 13:57:00 up 123 days, 13:30, 2 users, load average: 0.00, 0.02, 0.06 -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: mozilla and enigmail
Randy McMurchy wrote: stirling wrote these words on 08/02/05 23:48 CST: enigmail and ipc need version bumps in the mozilla instructions to be consistent with the versions used for thunderbird: enigmail-0.92.0 ipc-1.1.3 Indeed. Mozdev shows these versions to be used with Mozilla-1.7.x This almost seems something that should be fixed for the 6.1 release. Thoughts from others? If there is positive feedback, I'll BZ this and let Bruce make a decision when he returns. Seems worth doing to me. R. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Suggestion for Vim instructions
Randy McMurchy wrote: Yes, that would be better. I wonder how much trouble it is to point just the docs of /usr/share/vim/vim63 over to /usr/share/doc. There is a whole bunch of stuff installed in /usr/share/vim/vim63 other than the docs. I started playing with this, and I got it to work, albeit hackishly. If someone else wants to test this out and let me know if they get similar results: echo '#define SYS_VIMRC_FILE /etc/vimrc' src/feature.h echo '#define DFLT_HELPFILE /usr/share/doc/vim-6.3/help.txt' \ src/feature.h patch -Np1 -i ../vim-6.3-security_fix-1.patch ./configure --prefix=/usr --enable-multibyte make HELPSUBLOC=/usr/share/doc/vim-6.3 -C src make HELPSUBLOC=/usr/share/doc/vim-6.3 -C src install ln -s ../../vim/vim63/syntax /usr/share/doc/vim-6.3/ The above is from looking through the src/Makefile and toying with variables. I really don't like the last symlink, nor do I quite understand it, but on the last build I would get an error message when parsing the /etc/vimrc file containing 'syntax on' saying that it couldn't find /usr/share/doc/vim-6.3/syntax/syntax.vim, though from everything I read it shouldn't be looking there. Anyway, it's a start - perhaps someone can find a simpler method? -- JH -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Upcoming util-linux
steve crosby wrote: Just a heads up - util-linux 2.13 will remove several items, as per the following changelog entry for pre1 Changes: GNU autoconf/automake/libtool are now used for building. Yay! However, the autoconfigury in this pre1 release is busted. Most of the --enable-xxx and -disable-xxx switches don't work. In configure.ac for the AC_ARG_ENABLE switches, the developer has used $withval when he should be using $enableval. This is covered in the Autoconf manual. I've sent a bug report upstream. Regards Greg -- http://www.diy-linux.org/ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Texinfo nit
Hi all, Noted in the Chapter 6 Texinfo instructions is that the texi2pdf shell script is not listed in the Installed programs section. Perhaps this needs to be added, and a note added to the Errata page. -- Randy rmlscsi: [GNU ld version 2.15.94.0.2 20041220] [gcc (GCC) 3.4.3] [GNU C Library stable release version 2.3.4] [Linux 2.6.10 i686] 19:10:01 up 123 days, 18:43, 2 users, load average: 1.02, 0.89, 0.49 -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Upcoming util-linux
Greg Schafer wrote: - `setfdprm' is gone, yet `/etc/fdprm' is still installed. This looks like a bug methinks. - these symlinks are installed in /sbin all pointing to `initctl': `display-services' `need' `provide'. Bug? Prolly. - these symlinks are installed in /sbin all pointing to `shutdown': `fastboot' `fasthalt' `halt' `reboot'. Bug? Prolly. There is some missing `if BUILD_INIT' stuff in login-utils/Makefile.am explaining those last 2 bugs. I've sent another bug report upstream covering all of the above. Regards Greg -- http://www.diy-linux.org/ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Bzip2 documentation
Hi all, There is a manual in html, pdf and ps formats along with a bzip2.txt file included in the Bzip2 source tree. This documentation is not installed in the default installation. Attached is a patch that can be installed using the LFS conventional method of 'patch -Np1 -i ../patchname' which will install the docs to /usr/share/doc/bzip2-1.0.3. I suggest this patch is incorporated into the default LFS builds. Keep in mind that this patch will require some maintenance when the Bzip2 package is updated, as the version number is hard-wired into the patch. I couldn't find any version entity or anything in the Makefile that I could reference to get a version number. -- Randy rmlscsi: [GNU ld version 2.15.94.0.2 20041220] [gcc (GCC) 3.4.3] [GNU C Library stable release version 2.3.4] [Linux 2.6.10 i686] 21:58:00 up 123 days, 21:31, 2 users, load average: 0.02, 0.02, 0.02 Submitted By:Randy McMurchy randy_at_linuxfromscratch_dot_org Date:2005-08-03 Initial Package Version: 1.0.3 Upstream Status: Not submitted Origin: Randy McMurchy Description: Installs pre-formatted documentation diff -Naur bzip2-1.0.3-orig/Makefile bzip2-1.0.3/Makefile --- bzip2-1.0.3-orig/Makefile 2005-02-17 11:28:24.0 + +++ bzip2-1.0.3/Makefile 2005-08-04 02:42:10.0 + @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ if ( test ! -d $(PREFIX)/man ) ; then mkdir -p $(PREFIX)/man ; fi if ( test ! -d $(PREFIX)/man/man1 ) ; then mkdir -p $(PREFIX)/man/man1 ; fi if ( test ! -d $(PREFIX)/include ) ; then mkdir -p $(PREFIX)/include ; fi + if ( test ! -d $(PREFIX)/share/doc/bzip2-1.0.3 ) ; then mkdir -p $(PREFIX)/share/doc/bzip2-1.0.3 ; fi cp -f bzip2 $(PREFIX)/bin/bzip2 cp -f bzip2 $(PREFIX)/bin/bunzip2 cp -f bzip2 $(PREFIX)/bin/bzcat @@ -94,6 +95,14 @@ echo .so man1/bzgrep.1 $(PREFIX)/man/man1/bzfgrep.1 echo .so man1/bzmore.1 $(PREFIX)/man/man1/bzless.1 echo .so man1/bzdiff.1 $(PREFIX)/man/man1/bzcmp.1 + cp -f manual.html $(PREFIX)/share/doc/bzip2-1.0.3 + cp -f manual.pdf $(PREFIX)/share/doc/bzip2-1.0.3 + cp -f manual.ps $(PREFIX)/share/doc/bzip2-1.0.3 + cp -f bzip2.txt $(PREFIX)/share/doc/bzip2-1.0.3 + chmod a+r $(PREFIX)/share/doc/bzip2-1.0.3/manual.html + chmod a+r $(PREFIX)/share/doc/bzip2-1.0.3/manual.pdf + chmod a+r $(PREFIX)/share/doc/bzip2-1.0.3/manual.ps + chmod a+r $(PREFIX)/share/doc/bzip2-1.0.3/bzip2.txt clean: rm -f *.o libbz2.a bzip2 bzip2recover \ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Bzip2 documentation
On 8/4/05, Randy McMurchy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Attached is a patch that can be installed using the LFS conventional method of 'patch -Np1 -i ../patchname' which will install the docs to /usr/share/doc/bzip2-1.0.3. I suggest this patch is incorporated into the default LFS builds. Keep in mind that this patch will require some maintenance when the Bzip2 package is updated, as the version number is hard-wired into the patch. I couldn't find any version entity or anything in the Makefile that I could reference to get a version number. Updated version attached, using DISTNAME makefile variable for version control (and other minor enhancements) -- - Steve Crosby bzip2-1.0.3-install_docs-2.patch Description: Binary data -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
libcurses.so - libncurses.so symlink and ldconfig
Hello,
The LFS-6.1 book creates the /usr/lib/libcurses.so - libncurses.so
symlink during ncurses installation. A possible problem is that ldconfig
also looks at that symlink. So after running the following commands as root:
cd /usr/lib ; /sbin/ldconfig ; ls -l lib{n,}curses*
the result is something like:
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 12 Jun 23 12:02 libcurses.a - libncurses.a
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 13 Jun 23 12:03 libcurses.so - libncurses.so
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 103046 Jun 23 12:03 libncurses++.a
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 369990 Jun 23 12:02 libncurses.a
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 25 Jun 23 12:03 libncurses.so -
../../lib/libncurses.so.5
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 12 Jun 23 12:14 libncurses.so.5 - libcurses.so
Note the last symlink (created by ldconfig). I don't know if it is a
real problem (but it sometimes shows e.g. in ldd /bin/bash on
glibc-2.3.5 based systems). If this symlink is indeed bad, it can be
removed and the libcurses.so - libncurses.so symlink can be replaced
with a simple linker script:
rm libncurses.so.5
rm libcurses.so
echo 'INPUT(-lncurses)' libcurses.so
If the symlink is a non-problem, sorry for the noise.
--
Alexander E. Patrakov
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
