Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.10

[Douglas R. Reno]

On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 4:02 PM, Samuel Tyler <
samuel.ty...@education.nsw.gov.au> wrote:

> Okay - both have 0 active tickets - when is it going to be released now?
>
> Samuel
>
>
Wednesday.

Please don't top post :-) It makes reading things much harder for me.

Douglas R. Reno
--LFS/BLFS systemd maintainer
-- 
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

Re: [lfs-support] Force i386

[Rob]

William Harrington  wrote:
> If we get a break in real world prioritized responsibilities, then
> the book may get some excellent updates. Until then, we
> are working at a frivolous pace.

Absolutely. I did not mean that as a criticism at all.
In fact, I intend looking at the CLFS roadmap and seeing if I can
apply it on newer versions. Not on a production box, of course,
but I'll build from the book first and then see if I can update it.
Thank you all for the excellent work.
-- 
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

Re: [lfs-support] LFS 7.10

[Samuel Tyler]

Okay - both have 0 active tickets - when is it going to be released now?

Samuel

On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 3:03 PM, Samuel Tyler <
samuel.ty...@education.nsw.gov.au> wrote:

> Thanks.
>
>
> On Friday, 2 September 2016, Bruce Dubbs  wrote:
>
>> Samuel Tyler wrote:
>>
>>> In short: When is LFS 7.10 going to be released?
>>>
>>> It is in 100% in the LFS Trac, but in BLFS Trac it is 99%. Is that why?
>>>
>>> How long do you think it will be until it is released?
>>>
>>
>> We want to release LFS and BLFS together.  Probably sometime next week.
>>
>>   -- Bruce
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
>> FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
>> Unsubscribe: See the above information page
>>
>> Do not top post on this list.
>>
>> A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
>> Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
>> A: Top-posting.
>> Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style
>>
>
>
> --
> Samuel Tyler
>
***
This message is intended for the addressee named and may contain privileged 
information or confidential information or both. If you are not the intended 
recipient please delete it and notify the sender.
-- 
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

Re: [lfs-support] Force i386

[William Harrington]

On Mon, 05 Sep 2016 06:02:20 -0500
"Rob"  wrote:

> Well it's using kernel 3.14. We're at kernel 4.7.2. I am not sure about the 
> security risks of running such old stuff. The copyright date is 2014. That's 
> what I meant by a few years behind.

Both LFS and CLFS are a guide. Since we aren't bleeding edge with distros 
doesn't mean the instructions won't result the required position. We have 
plenty of tickets to keep us busy at http://trac.clfs.org. The fact that the 
book is at a 3.14 kernel means nothing. The stable book is the latest release. 
The great new features are in the dev book. Follow that and review the tickets 
for the upcoming updates to the dev book for the future release. If we get a 
break in real world prioritized responsibilities, then the book may get some 
excellent updates. Until then, we are working at a frivolous pace.

Sincerely,
William Harrington
-- 
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

Re: [lfs-support] Force i386

[Pierre Labastie]

On 05/09/2016 13:02, Rob wrote:

Ken Moffat  wrote:

Building LFS for the first time is hard. Many people have trouble.
And multilib is harder still (or perhaps just "more tedious", but
"harder" is probably a better starting assumption).

I wouldn't say harder but tedious definitely. There aren't a lot of 
instructions out there, either. The stuff I found says things like, enable 
multilib repository in xx distribution; or edit your apt sources and install 
these packages. Nothing about enabling a multilib toolchain from source. I'm 
beginning to think I'll have to read C programming books to figure everything 
out.


Cross-lfs may well be using older packages than LFS - they have even
fewer developers and builders than we do - but to suggest they are
"a few years behind" is an overstatement.

Well it's using kernel 3.14. We're at kernel 4.7.2. I am not sure about the 
security risks of running such old stuff. The copyright date is 2014. That's 
what I meant by a few years behind.



You should use development:
http://clfs.org/files/BOOK/CLFS-SYSTEMD-TRUNK-GIT-20160729-CHUNKS.tar.bz2 
(for systemd)

or
http://clfs.org/files/BOOK/CLFS-SYSVINIT-TRUNK-SYSVINIT-20160729-CHUNKS.tar.bz2 
(for SYS V)


or you can render the books yourself from the git repo:
-
cd
git clone git://git.clfs.org/cross-lfs.git
cd cross-lfs/BOOK
# Next line only for SYS V
git checkout sysvinit
make
--
Point your browser to file://path>/cross-lfs/render/index.html



Pierre


--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

Re: [lfs-support] Force i386

[akhiezer]

> From: "Rob" 
> Date: Mon, 05 Sep 2016 06:02:20 -0500
> Subject: Re: [lfs-support] Force i386
>
> Ken Moffat  wrote:
> > Building LFS for the first time is hard. Many people have trouble.
> > And multilib is harder still (or perhaps just "more tedious", but
> > "harder" is probably a better starting assumption).
>
> I wouldn't say harder but tedious definitely. There aren't a lot of 
> instructions out there, either. The stuff I found says things like, enable 
> multilib repository in xx distribution; or edit your apt sources and install 
> these packages. Nothing about enabling a multilib toolchain from source. I'm 
> beginning to think I'll have to read C programming books to figure everything 
> out.
>


Slackware's multilib acknowledges 'Slamd64' and 'CLFS' as the two
principal references used:
http://alien.slackbook.org/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=slackware:multilib  .


> > Cross-lfs may well be using older packages than LFS - they have even
> > fewer developers and builders than we do - but to suggest they are
> > "a few years behind" is an overstatement.  
>
> Well it's using kernel 3.14. We're at kernel 4.7.2. I am not sure about the 
> security risks of running such old stuff. The copyright date is 2014. That's 
> what I meant by a few years behind.
>


You can usually drop-in a newer kernel no-probs.


>
> > My suggestion to Rob is that he should build LFS, plus whichever
> > parts of BLFS are useful to him.  
>
> This is my third build of LFS/BLFS. The first two times, I built for i686. 
> This time, I wanted to build for x86_64, but still be able to run a couple of 
> i686 binaries and libes on there. Here is where I ran into problems, and 
> which is what prompted my questions.
> I eventually gave up trying to figure out the multilib/arch stuff, and 
> yesterday I just built LFS 7.10 on an i686 machine.


Another way is to run a 32-bit os as a vm.


> As I said earlier, I think I'll have to find a good C reference and try to 
> figure everything out. The problem I've found with that is a lot of C books 
> figure you already have everything installed already--all your toolchains and 
> stuff. So they don't talk about it.


Or just read gcc docs first.



rgds,
akh


p.s. pls wrap your lines to ca 74-80 chars' width.





--
-- 
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style

Re: [lfs-support] Force i386

[Rob]

Ken Moffat  wrote:
> Building LFS for the first time is hard. Many people have trouble.
> And multilib is harder still (or perhaps just "more tedious", but
> "harder" is probably a better starting assumption).

I wouldn't say harder but tedious definitely. There aren't a lot of 
instructions out there, either. The stuff I found says things like, enable 
multilib repository in xx distribution; or edit your apt sources and install 
these packages. Nothing about enabling a multilib toolchain from source. I'm 
beginning to think I'll have to read C programming books to figure everything 
out.

> Cross-lfs may well be using older packages than LFS - they have even
> fewer developers and builders than we do - but to suggest they are
> "a few years behind" is an overstatement.  

Well it's using kernel 3.14. We're at kernel 4.7.2. I am not sure about the 
security risks of running such old stuff. The copyright date is 2014. That's 
what I meant by a few years behind.


> My suggestion to Rob is that he should build LFS, plus whichever
> parts of BLFS are useful to him.  

This is my third build of LFS/BLFS. The first two times, I built for i686. This 
time, I wanted to build for x86_64, but still be able to run a couple of i686 
binaries and libes on there. Here is where I ran into problems, and which is 
what prompted my questions.
I eventually gave up trying to figure out the multilib/arch stuff, and 
yesterday I just built LFS 7.10 on an i686 machine. As I said earlier, I think 
I'll have to find a good C reference and try to figure everything out. The 
problem I've found with that is a lot of C books figure you already have 
everything installed already--all your toolchains and stuff. So they don't talk 
about it.
-- 
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Do not top post on this list.

A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style