Randy McMurchy wrote:
Hi all,
On 10/30 of last year Bruce updated the SANE package and added the parameter
--disable-latex to the configure command. There is no reason listed in the
Command Explanations why. My tests show that if TeX is installed, the latex
procedure does what it is supposed
Randy McMurchy wrote:
Hi all,
In the DejaVu Fonts installation instructions shown on the Xorg configuration
page, the instructions seem to need an update. First, the fonts are now in a
subdirectory of the source directory, so the installation of the TTF files
do not work as shown in the
DJ Lucas wrote:
On 01/25/2013 10:40 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Randy McMurchy wrote:
3) The --libexecdir= switch points to a non-standard location. libexecdir
location has always been /usr/lib/packagename,
Yes, historically it was, however, it should now be where the package
maintainer chooses
Randy McMurchy wrote:
Hi all,
Earlier there was/is a discussion on why BLFS is adamant about describing
the various commands/descriptions/parameters/options used in the instructions
for BLFS packages. I would like to present a really good example why these
trivial (to us Editors) blurbs in
To Armin and Randy:
Thanks for all the updates to BLFS lately. We are down to 31 open
tickets and progress has been quite steady. It looks like many of the
tickets left open are fairly simple version updates.
LFS will be going into a freeze for 7.3-rc1 in two or three weeks. The
goal of
Thomas Trepl wrote:
Hi all,
I just had a look to the Editors Guide an i think there is some tweaking
required. Just to make sure that I do not mess up anything (and not being
totally confused) :
Q: svn repo lives on svn.linuxfromscratch.org from now on?
The edguide names it at
Randy McMurchy wrote:
Hi all,
Somehow, my installation of the BLFS book in my sandbox doesn't point at
the new server. I do not even want to think how it happened as I have been
cloning my sandbox (BLFS repo) for years every time I have a new build.
My most recent updates are not being
Wayne Blaszczyk wrote:
I've been using (pure (no bootscripts)) systemd for the past 4 months
when I upgraded to LFS 7.2, and I'm quite happy with it. I don't see
what all the negative fuss with it was all about.
We try to explain what is going on with the boot process. Systemd makes
it
Armin K. wrote:
On 01/21/2013 07:06 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Wayne Blaszczyk wrote:
I've been using (pure (no bootscripts)) systemd for the past 4 months
when I upgraded to LFS 7.2, and I'm quite happy with it. I don't see
what all the negative fuss with it was all about.
We try to explain
Randy McMurchy wrote:
Hi all,
Excuse my ignorance on this subject as the /run filesystem is new to
me and I am curious how everyone is handling directories in /run that
are expected to exist after a system reboot. Many packages create
directories during their installation procedure in /run
Jean-Philippe MENGUAL wrote:
Hi,
Only to report a bug. In openJDK instructions, the book says this command:
export PATH=PATH:/opt/OpenJDK-1.7.0.9-bin/bin
It should say:
export PATH=$PATH:/opt/OpenJDK-1.7.0.9-bin/bin
OK, thanks. Fixed in revision 10941.
-- Bruce
--
I downloaded sbc-1.0.tar.xz and the checksum was
aa2bc39c4a09aade064efea4bbbc4b2d but the book has
d01dab8c54638710c958cc2ceaff145a
Which is correct?
-- Bruce
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the
Ken Moffat wrote:
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 01:25:00AM +0100, Armin K. wrote:
Dana 11.1.2013 0:44, Jean-Philippe MENGUAL je napisao:
Hi,
On my lfs, I build orca, as I need a screen reader in my daily usage of LFS
and
because I want to build gnome3.6 to do tests. BLFS mentions, as recommended
Tobias Gasser wrote:
spice does not search for /usr/X11/include
i know, the book does no longer support this and i already have some
other packages where i have to spcecify flags or patch the makefiles.
We do support alternative locations for Xorg. Some packages need to
have the
Armin K. wrote:
Back in summer, I asked about libjpeg-turbo and if it should be added in
the book.
libjpeg-turbo is a fork of the original IJG libjpeg that uses SIMD to
accelerate many things such as encoding and decoding of jpeg images.
It is fully compatible with current libjpeg (v8) and
Armin K. wrote:
On 01/05/2013 10:14 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Armin K. wrote:
Again, same error. Now just on lfsbook.linuxfromscratch.org
http://lfsbook.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/changelog-2012.txt
Hmm. I put it there again just now. I think it will stay, but we need
to check again tomorrow
Armin K. wrote:
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/changelog-2012.txt
gives error 404
I think I've got it fixed now. It's not updated daily like most of the
other files, so it was just a matter of getting it in the right place.
-- Bruce
--
Armin K. wrote:
On 01/01/2013 05:54 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Armin K. wrote:
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/changelog-2012.txt
gives error 404
It's there now, but it should have shown up automatically. I'll keep an
eye on it.
Again, same error. Now just
Armin K. wrote:
On 01/03/2013 11:03 PM, Tobias Gasser wrote:
any hint what else i can try to build 1.0.1?
As you see, libtirpc is not yet ready to take over RPC stuff. That's why
Glibc developers introduced --enable-obsolete-rpc switch if an user
wants to enable RPC API/ABI once again. It
Tobias Gasser wrote:
i have --with-systemdsystemunitdir=no as mentionned in the book, but
still a lot of systemd stuff is installed
how can i disable building this unwanted stuff?
as far i can understand udev from lfs is very limited. i have
introspection and i want gudev installed.
until
Tobias Gasser wrote:
Am 02.01.2013 21:21, schrieb Bruce Dubbs:
Tobias Gasser wrote:
i have --with-systemdsystemunitdir=no as mentionned in the book, but
still a lot of systemd stuff is installed
how can i disable building this unwanted stuff?
as far i can understand udev from lfs is very
Tobias Gasser wrote:
Am 02.01.2013 13:38, schrieb Tobias Gasser:
systemd-196
make check has a lot of failures due to hard coded
/usr/lib/udev/rules.d in src/test/test-udev.c where as
/lib/udev/rules.d should be used!
easy to fix with a simple sed.
meanwhile i know i was wrong building
Ken Moffat wrote:
I think the real question is whether people using k3b, such as
Baho, and anyone using dvd::rip, can get those to successfully use
transcode. For people using transcode on the command line, I suspect
that transcode commands which use ffmpeg will still be problematic.
I've
BLFS Trac wrote:
Also, someone broke pipermail ...
Unfortunately that was done on purpose. Gerard had 500 GB over his
normal download limit last month and got hit with a huge change. Most
of it seemed to be downloading all of pipermail by multiple entities.
We'll try to get it back when
I've updated the dates for the book to 2013 and archived the 2012
changelog. You won't see the update in -book since it is over 200K and
I deleted the posting. The on-line book will be updated in a few hours.
Here are some statistics:
1469 Total Changes
127 abenton
247 bdubbs
Jean-Philippe MENGUAL wrote:
Yes, I had thought to the blog yesterday, and forgot while sending my mail
here.
Is there some format (some rules as the text in the hints)? Or is it a fully
free style text? I don't know if some policy is established related to the
blog
as it's a recent
Randy McMurchy wrote:
Ken Moffat wrote these words on 12/15/12 20:39 CST:
On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 08:16:12PM -0600, Randy McMurchy wrote:
No big deal, I was just trying to find out the reasoning.
Please see the BLFS-dev archives from June 2012 under the title
'TCP Wrapper'. I agree with
Randy McMurchy wrote:
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 12/15/12 21:23 CST:
tcpwrappers just gets in the way. For -support issues, it causes more
problems then it solves.
What problems is it expected to solve? :-)
(sarcasm) I suppose it is difficult to explain the syntax of the hosts.allow
Randy McMurchy wrote:
Hi all,
I am a bit confused with the language in the libtirpc instructions.
Paraphrasing,
it says that /usr/include/rpc/rpc.h should not be installed by default if the
version of Glibc is =2.14, but I just installed current LFS-Development that
includes Glibc-2.16 and
Randy McMurchy wrote:
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 12/15/12 22:29 CST:
The glibc folks left it out for a couple of versions and then put it
back after a lot of complaints. LFS 7.1 had the problem of leaving it out.
Which means the text in the BLFS book should be modified ever so slightly
Armin K. wrote:
On 12/14/2012 05:25 AM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
I was trying to build k3b today and ran into some problems with ffmpeg.
I did apply the existing patch, but that wasn't enough.
Searching the web, I found
http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-kde3/2012-07/msg00019.html
Applying
Armin K. wrote:
Are you sure that you have used the correct patch?
That's it. I had the -1 patch, not the -2 patch in my files and didn't
notice the change. Thanks. That's why I was confirming.
-- Bruce
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ:
I was trying to build k3b today and ran into some problems with ffmpeg.
I did apply the existing patch, but that wasn't enough.
Searching the web, I found
http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-kde3/2012-07/msg00019.html
Applying the equivalent of this patch allowed the program to build and
it
Randy McMurchy wrote:
Hi all,
I've been working on updating the Perl Modules page. I really like how all
the dependency links now point at a page where you can download the current
version of the package instead of hard-coding a version into the BLFS
instructions.
This makes the upkeep of
Randy McMurchy wrote:
Hi all,
I'd like to give some input about the CA Certs installation. First, why are
the shell scripts installed in /bin and not /usr/bin? The wget program is not
available and chances are networking is not enabled in single usr mode (why
else would /usr not be mounted?)
Randy McMurchy wrote:
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 12/10/12 17:11 CST:
I don't think so. The code is right there to see. It's only three
scripts and they need to be in the PATH to run with the instructions
given. What benefit would DESTDIR give?
Actually, they don't *have
John Burrell wrote:
Bruce - not sure if I should report this - seems too trivial. But,
here goes -
in the last gray box at the bottom of the CVS page there is a stray i
- first char in that box.
This gives me:
/usr/src/programming/cvs/build: line 57: i: command not found
on running my
applications in an LFS environment.
-- Bruce Dubbs
linuxfromscratch.org
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Armin K. wrote:
On 12/02/2012 09:58 AM, Tobias Gasser wrote:
GNOME Keyring from the book can perfectly work with Xfce. There is not
any conflict between GTK+3 and GTK+2...
hmmm.
http://blog.xfce.org/
scroll down to 'Gtk3'
First 2 things: no Xfce 4.10 is not using gtk3, only the
Tomasz Sekściński wrote:
Hi,
Index: BOOK/pst/ps/a2ps.xml
===
--- BOOK/pst/ps/a2ps.xml (wersja 10873)
+++ BOOK/pst/ps/a2ps.xml (kopia robocza)
@@ -137,7 +137,7 @@
paraIf desired, install the downloaded i18n-fonts by
Tobias Gasser wrote:
building xfsprogs as in the book fails.
compiling and installing seems to work. but several libraries are not
installed!
I created a ticket so we don't forget about this.
-- Bruce
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ:
Fernando de Oliveira wrote:
--- Em seg, 29/10/12, Bruce Dubbs escreveu:
De: Bruce Dubbs
Assunto: Re: [blfs-dev] OT - Hardware Problems again, but perhaps solved
Para: BLFS Development List
Data: Segunda-feira, 29 de Outubro de 2012, 13:08
Fernando de Oliveira wrote:
Yesterday, one 500MB
Armin K. wrote:
Dana 13.11.2012 22:26, Fernando de Oliveira je napisao:
--- Em ter, 13/11/12, Armin K. kre...@email.com escreveu:
I am just following the book. But libsoup could not be installed without
glib.
I think glib should be *required* in libsoup. It cannot be built without
glib. At
Fernando de Oliveira wrote:
Every reinstall fails, then I have definitely added the line
rm -v /usr/share/cups/charsets/pdf.utf-8
to the script.
Error log:
...
make install-data-hook
make[2]: Entrando no diretório
Fernando de Oliveira wrote:
Bruce,
Thank you for the comments in the ticket.
One thing I do not understand.
* general.ent needs a date change at the top
Also, I did not want to use svn to send, as once you told me, because
being the first attempt, I was expecting (many) corrections.
I
Fernando de Oliveira wrote:
--- Em dom, 4/11/12, Bruce Dubbs escreveu:
De: Bruce Dubbs
Assunto: Re: [blfs-dev] Finishing up BLFS checks for LFS-7.2
Para: BLFS Development List
Data: Domingo, 4 de Novembro de 2012, 22:55
Fernando de Oliveira wrote:
--- Em qua, 31/10/12, Bruce Dubbs escreveu
Fernando de Oliveira wrote:
--- Em dom, 4/11/12, Bruce Dubbs escreveu:
De: Bruce Dubbs
Assunto: Re: [blfs-dev] gegl-0.2.0 and (gtk-?)doc
Para: BLFS Development List blfs-dev@linuxfromscratch.org
Data: Domingo, 4 de Novembro de 2012, 22:58
Perhaps we should promote gtk-doc to recommended
Fernando de Oliveira wrote:
--- Em qua, 31/10/12, Bruce Dubbs escreveu:
I updated the instructions yesterday. They build OK, but have not
been tested. Please use the most current instructions and let me
know how it goes.
After solving some problems, I could install sane and xsane today
Fernando de Oliveira wrote:
Resending with proper line format.
--- Em dom, 4/11/12, Ken Moffat escreveu:
De: Ken Moffat
Assunto: Re: [blfs-dev] gegl-0.2.0 and (gtk-?)doc
blfs-dev@linuxfromscratch.org
Data: Domingo, 4 de Novembro de 2012, 21:10
On Sun, Nov 04, 2012 at 02:29:39PM
-0800,
Thomas de Roo wrote:
Maybe this is the right moment for a BLFS 7.2 release?
That thought did occur to me, but I think the rate of development is too
fast. What we have now will be out of date soon as updates to packages
are released.
-- Bruce
--
Ken Moffat wrote:
On Fri, Nov 02, 2012 at 10:43:43AM -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Thomas de Roo wrote:
Maybe this is the right moment for a BLFS 7.2 release?
That thought did occur to me, but I think the rate of development is too
fast. What we have now will be out of date soon as updates
Thomas de Roo wrote:
Ken Moffat schreef op 2012-11-02 18:11:
On Fri, Nov 02, 2012 at 10:43:43AM -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Thomas de Roo wrote:
Maybe this is the right moment for a BLFS 7.2 release?
That thought did occur to me, but I think the rate of development is
too
fast. What we
Fernando de Oliveira wrote:
pst/scanning/sane.xml:
Update to 1.0.23
Needs scanner
pst/scanning/xsane.xml:
Needs Scanner
How about _built tags?
Not the best result, but I suppose it will have to do for
now.
I will try to build and check these two,
Fernando de Oliveira wrote:
I do not remember getting this before lfs7.2:
configure: error: Package requirements (fuse = 2.3 glib-2.0 gthread-2.0)
were not met:
No package 'glib-2.0' found
No package 'gthread-2.0' found
It looks like we need to add glib. It's not in any docs, but is in
I'm in the final stages of checking all the BLFS packages for
compatibility with LFS-7.2, but need some help. I can't easily check
the following:
gnome/applications/sound-juicer.xml: Needs GNOME
multimedia/videoutils/dvb-apps.xml: Needs TV card
networking/netutils/wicd.xml:
Armin K. wrote:
On 10/30/2012 08:17 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
I'm in the final stages of checking all the BLFS packages for
compatibility with LFS-7.2, but need some help. I can't easily check
the following:
gnome/applications/sound-juicer.xml: Needs GNOME
I can check this one.
Thanks
Armin K. wrote:
Should we re-add Ekiga to book?
3.3.2 is available from August 2011 and it is GTK+3 port. It should work
(tm). Recently there has been 3.9.90 release which is sort of unstable,
but I guess that distros are going to migrate asap.
Which one should we choose?
Opal and Ptlib
Fernando de Oliveira wrote:
So, past Monday, I finally sent it for repair. Now it is back since
Friday, apparently working without problems. The technician did not know
exactly what to do, only some ideas. The composite solution I found:
1. Replacing all cables (technician's and my idea).
Should we archive sawfish? It has not been updated since January 2010.
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/svn/x/sawfish.html
-- Bruce
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information
Jocelyn Fréchot wrote:
Le 29/10/2012 18:11, Bruce Dubbs a écrit :
Should we archive sawfish? It has not been updated since January 2010.
Sawfish has moved away from Sourceforge:
http://sawfish.wikia.com/
Latest release (1.9.1) is from september.
Thanks. I'll try it out
Jocelyn Fréchot wrote:
Le 29/10/2012 18:11, Bruce Dubbs a écrit :
Should we archive sawfish? It has not been updated since January 2010.
Sawfish has moved away from Sourceforge:
http://sawfish.wikia.com/
Latest release (1.9.1) is from september.
The build with the new version seems
I just spent some time updating ptlib and opal.
Both packages were a bit of a pain because they needed a sed and a patch
respectively.
Then I checked what used these packages. The only package that uses
ptlib is opal and the only package that uses opal is
archive/gnome-obsolete/ekiga.xml
:(
Should we archive lprng? AFAICT, most of the programs it provides, lrp,
lpq, lprm, lpstat, etc are provided by cups and cups seems to be much
more active.
-- Bruce
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See
Armin K. wrote:
On 10/26/2012 08:29 PM, bdu...@linuxfromscratch.org wrote:
Author: bdubbs
Date: 2012-10-26 12:29:14 -0600 (Fri, 26 Oct 2012)
New Revision: 10804
Modified:
trunk/BOOK/xsoft/office/abiword.xml
Log:
Add required dependency to abiword
Just curious, have you used
John Burrell wrote:
Bruce
I'd like to help but I'm running an svn version of LFS, not 7.2.
I guess that disqualifies me, right?
That depends on the svn version. Anything after 2012-08-23 (7.2-rc1)
would be OK.
-- Bruce
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ:
Armin K. wrote:
Dana 21.10.2012 20:04, Bruce Dubbs je napisao:
OK, the files repo is now up-to-date.
I took a look at anduin's blfs hieararchy and found lot of packages
there that are not in the book anymore. If you desire, you can remove
the following tarballs from anduin's blfs directory
In reviewing the status of the book, I see that we still have 42
packages that have not been confirmed as building and running properly
for LFS-7.2 and were last checked for LFS-7.0. I'd like to ask for some
volunteers to check some of the packages below and answer the following
questions:
Armin K. wrote:
On 10/22/2012 02:01 AM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Armin K. wrote:
Dana 21.10.2012 20:04, Bruce Dubbs je napisao:
OK, the files repo is now up-to-date.
-- Bruce
I took a look at anduin's blfs hieararchy and found lot of packages
there that are not in the book anymore
Wayne Blaszczyk wrote:
On 22/10/12 09:22, Armin K. wrote:
Dana 21.10.2012 22:37, Wayne Blaszczyk je napisao:
Hi All,
The following instruction creates a file called docbook-xsl-1.77.1
rather than a directory.
install -v -m644 -D README \
Armin,
The book has been updated to use gnome-system-log-3.6.1.tar.xz and
gucharmap-3.6.1.tar.xz, but neither are available at the gnome web site.
-- Bruce
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the
Armin K. wrote:
On 10/21/2012 06:57 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Armin,
The book has been updated to use gnome-system-log-3.6.1.tar.xz and
gucharmap-3.6.1.tar.xz, but neither are available at the gnome web site.
Whoops. It should be gnome-system-monitor-3.6.1 and gucharmap-3.6.0
OK
Armin K. wrote:
Dana 21.10.2012 20:04, Bruce Dubbs je napisao:
OK, the files repo is now up-to-date.
-- Bruce
I took a look at anduin's blfs hieararchy and found lot of packages
there that are not in the book anymore. If you desire, you can remove
the following tarballs from anduin's
DJ Lucas wrote:
On 10/19/2012 12:37 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
I've been looking at updating iced tea.
rant I'm into problems because the make files have hard coded paths
into make files. /usr/bin/head (which is in /bin) and /bin/touch (which
is in /usr/bin/touch). What are these guys thinking
DJ Lucas wrote:
BTW, what do we call this version. It's icedtea-2.3.3, but the build says:
java version 1.7.0_0
OpenJDK Runtime Environment (build 1.7.0-b36)
OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM (build 23.2-b09, mixed mode)
Right now we are calling the current version OpenJDK-1.7.0.5, but the
most
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
DJ Lucas wrote:
BTW, what do we call this version. It's icedtea-2.3.3, but the build
says:
java version 1.7.0_0
OpenJDK Runtime Environment (build 1.7.0-b36)
OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM (build 23.2-b09, mixed mode)
Right now we are calling the current version OpenJDK
Fernando de Oliveira wrote:
Since JDK, I was numbering using book's convention and comparing numbers
with other distributions and with the convention in JDK site. So, I changed
the subject for what was normal in the past.
What name to be used is not important for me, but in many other
I've been looking at updating iced tea.
rant I'm into problems because the make files have hard coded paths
into make files. /usr/bin/head (which is in /bin) and /bin/touch (which
is in /usr/bin/touch). What are these guys thinking? why can't they
use the PATH? /rant
Has anyone else
Aleksandar Kuktin wrote:
On Fri, 19 Oct 2012 12:37:53 -0500
Bruce Dubbs bruce.du...@gmail.com wrote:
I've been looking at updating iced tea.
rant I'm into problems because the make files have hard coded paths
into make files. /usr/bin/head (which is in /bin) and /bin/touch
(which
Fernando de Oliveira wrote:
--- Em sex, 19/10/12, Bruce Dubbs escreveu:
De: Bruce Dubbs
Assunto: [blfs-dev] iced tea
Para: BLFS Development List
Data: Sexta-feira, 19 de Outubro de 2012, 14:37
I've been looking at updating iced
tea.
rant I'm into problems because the make files have
Fernando de Oliveira wrote:
Previous attachment had a line out of order and with a typo.
[]s,
Fernando
Thanks. That's helpful. Right now I'm running tests, but that takes
quite a while.
I think we should change the book to do a 'make download' to get the aux
files. I also think the patch
When checking the older programs in BLFS, I found the following GNOME
packages have not been retagged for lfs72:
gnome-nettool
sound-juicer
alacarte
Are these OK for lfs-7.2?
-- Bruce
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ:
Armin K. wrote:
On 10/10/2012 07:46 PM, Tobias Gasser wrote:
Armin K. schrieb:
if [ $EUID = 0 ]; then make install
elif [ -x /usr/bin/sudo ]; then sudo make install
else su -c make install
fi
Add it by default instead of AS_ROOT make install, but explain how
should it be used and what it
Armin K. wrote:
On 10/08/2012 06:47 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Sorry for the delay, I've missed the reply somehow.
Well what we have now is wrong and what we had before is also wrong.
The above is right, but may not be elegant. It is, however, somewhat
educational.
It could be collapsed
Armin K. wrote:
On 10/09/2012 06:33 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Armin K. wrote:
From what I see, your command would attempt to use either sudo or su
even if ran as root user. Maybe some kind of am I root? checking
should be done there before trying to check for sudo or execute su
kre...@linuxfromscratch.org wrote:
Author: krejzi
Date: 2012-10-08 00:05:45 -0600 (Mon, 08 Oct 2012)
New Revision: 10721
Modified:
trunk/BOOK/x/installing/x7app.xml
trunk/BOOK/x/installing/x7font.xml
trunk/BOOK/x/installing/x7lib.xml
trunk/BOOK/x/installing/x7proto.xml
Ken Moffat wrote:
On Sun, Oct 07, 2012 at 12:37:50PM -0600, bdu...@linuxfromscratch.org wrote:
Author: bdubbs
Date: 2012-10-07 12:37:39 -0600 (Sun, 07 Oct 2012)
New Revision: 10719
Modified:
trunk/BOOK/general.ent
trunk/BOOK/general/graphlib/aalib.xml
Armin K. wrote:
On 06.10.2012 05:34, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
I've been looking at this package to upgrade the book and there needs to
be a few changes. One thing I found is that there are several
executables in the tools directory that are not installed:
I guess you can live qt-faststart
I've been looking at this package to upgrade the book and there needs to
be a few changes. One thing I found is that there are several
executables in the tools directory that are not installed:
-rwxrwxr-x 1 bdubbs bdubbs 18672 Oct 5 22:46 tools/aviocat
-rwxr-xr-x 1 bdubbs bdubbs 1086 Sep
Jeremy Henty wrote:
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
I've wondered, in the case of the kernel, whether is would be
beneficial to release the drivers as a separate tarball on a
different release schedule. I think that's where most of the
changes occur. In an uncompressed kernel
BLFS Trac wrote:
#3583: FFmpeg 1.0
Comment(by Krejzi):
How do you manage to control ticket system without it sending mails to
blfs-book? I don't remember getting mail with your reply.
As admin, I have a section of the summary page that allows Batch Modify
Properties. That doesn't send
Fernando de Oliveira wrote:
--- Em seg, 1/10/12, BLFS Trac escreveu:
Changes (by bdubbs@…):
* status: new = closed
* resolution: = wontfix
Comment:
I'm going to mark this as wontfix. IM manages to do a
sub-point
(major.minor.point-subpoint) release way too often.
It feels
Armin K. wrote:
Is it just me or mailman is again slow today? I have at least 20 minutes
delay before mails from mailing lists get to me.
I haven't really noticed it, but gmail does not send me my own posts.
The mail queue has 94 requests right now and mailman is supposed to
purge those in 5
Ken Moffat wrote:
Release early, release often. For major projects, weekly -rc
releases, and stable point releases as-necessary, is a good thing.
The release early, release often approach can be overdone. How is a
typical user supposed to know when a change is significant? I have no
Ken Moffat wrote:
I don't follow systemd, no doubt some of the changes are important
for the project, but without monitoring it I can't guess which, if
any, impact the udev part. I'm still hoping that standalone udev
will gain traction.
That would require a major attitude change from
Baho Utot wrote:
The md5sums have changed
md5sum cracklib-*
362232076930d062ae7db5c4b35ab824 cracklib-2.8.19.tar.gz
0a6d09b3714e0daa7bf217e0d234b255 cracklib-words-20080507.gz
I downloaded the http and ftp versions of the tarball and the md5sum is
correct. It is also correct for the
e1e3bfd048afa63e3187e9b9dc68f0c7 colord-0.1.23.tar.xz
The book has 019fa6f9349ef39d1bd28c3dcf6fb191
-- Bruce
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
We have:
GStreamer-0.10.36
gst-plugins-base-0.10.36
gst-plugins-good-0.10.31
gst-plugins-bad-0.10.23
gst-plugins-ugly-0.10.19
GStreamer-1.0.0
gst-plugins-base-1.0.0
gst-plugins-good-1.0.0
gst-plugins-bad-1.0.0
gst-plugins-ugly-1.0.0
There is one small sentence:
GStreamer 1.0 series are not API
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
We have:
GStreamer-0.10.36
gst-plugins-base-0.10.36
gst-plugins-good-0.10.31
gst-plugins-bad-0.10.23
gst-plugins-ugly-0.10.19
GStreamer-1.0.0
gst-plugins-base-1.0.0
gst-plugins-good-1.0.0
gst-plugins-bad-1.0.0
gst-plugins-ugly-1.0.0
Also: gstreamer-1.0.0.tar.xz
Armin K. wrote:
Hey guys, I just got this mail. GNOME 3.6 is in place, but I still see
some components as unstable versions. (odd major version numbers, but
released!)
Should I merge my work?
Original Message
Subject: GNOME 3.6 released
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2012 14:32:55
Armin K. wrote:
On 26.09.2012 20:48, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
I'd say that if they deviated from the odd/even protocol for
stable/unstable, then the overall announcement takes precedence. I
suggest using what they say are released versions even if they are odd
major version numbers
601 - 700 of 2449 matches
Mail list logo
