Can this notification be turned off as it could in Bugzilla?
Sorry, I'm not subscribed to blfs-book. I only happened to see this
because I was looking at the archives list to make sure the notification
went through.
I assume you mean that the reporter can opt to receive notifications or
Randy McMurchy wrote:
Why?
This person has deviated from the prescribed method of doing things.
Well, in many ways, that's the motto of LFS, right? Also, why is it
prescribed? Not because it's necessary, otherwise it would be listed
under Required. As Tushar said, usually it represents what
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Support is something that people volunteer. If a volunteer doesn't want
to help if the recommendations aren't followed, that is his choice.
Sometimes a user doesn't say that the recommendations wern't followed
and that can lead a supporter down a path that wastes time and
Randy McMurchy wrote:
But don't you feel that for the most part, folks that write in asking
for support that have exhibited a fair amount of research, get the
BLFS crowd's full attention and best attempt at a resolution? Even
better is if they've explained their deviation and why they did it.
Randy McMurchy wrote:
Sure that information would be nice. But it is expensive. Good
text describing research takes time and effort. You simply are
asking too much for Editors to do this when the whole point is
*We recommend you install X, Y, and Z*.
Well, don't you often mail this list
Randy McMurchy wrote:
With all due respect and consideration for your taking the time to
let us know your feelings, not providing anything that could help
make it better is well, umm, just complaining.
C,mon Jeremy, everyone who pitches in on the LFS side contributes
an idea, or some text
Randy McMurchy wrote:
You say this, but don't have to do any of the work. Perhaps you don't
realize how difficult it is to put together text *for a book*. Text
that needs to be accurate, well-reading, concise, grammatically
correct and to the point.
I do realize that it's difficult. I
Randy McMurchy wrote:
I am disappointed in my effort in describing the make -f client.mk
text. I mailed into the list asking for help. *Today* It went
unanswered.
I skipped over it because I had approximately 90 emails in my Inbox when
I arrived home tonight and my interests usually lie
Randy McMurchy wrote:
make -f client.mk ...: Mozilla products are packaged to allow the
use of a configuration file which can be used to pass the
configuration settings to the configure command.
Too many 'config*'s. What about this?
Packaged source code for Mozilla products make
Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
Too many 'config*'s. What about this?
Packaged source code for Mozilla products make use of a configuration
file that can be used to pass various options to the configure command.
Actually, after reading this again. You could almost drop the first
sentence entirely
Randy McMurchy wrote:
Hi all,
Recently we had a discussion about using the Mozilla NSPR/NSS package
as a stand-alone package for BLFS. This would allow Firefox, Thunderbird
and the Mozilla suite to share the system-installed copies of these
libraries and interface headers, as well as having
Randy McMurchy wrote:
I hope to finish with adding the NSS/NSPR installation to BLFS as
well as updating the text for Firefox/TBird and updating Mozilla
to 1.7.12 with updated text by the end of tomorrow night.
If you don't mind, I'd appreciate a ping to this list when you've got it
Hello,
The Subversion upgrade will be happening as planned this evening. It
will begin in approximately 2 hours 7:00pm EST (12:00am GMT). At that
time all the repositories will be offline. If this schedule doesn't work
for you, you have until then to notify me.
Thanks.
--
JH
--
Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
And the work begins now. Please consider all repositories as frozen
until further notice.
And the work ends now. Subversion is up and the repositories are
available and ready for commits. If you encounter any trouble please
send a message to the server-admin list.
Thanks
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Good approach. Make sure we dont have any processes scheduled
(/usr/bin/render* comes to mind) trying to use subversion during the
upgrade.
Please give the devs about two hours notice about when subversion will
be stopped and put the timezone into the message so there is no
To all Project Leads:
As was mentioned in a thread on the lfs-dev list, the server admins
would like to upgrade the version of Subversion on Belgarath. Being that
it's not a minor version upgrade, it is recommended by upstream devs to
dump and re-load the repositories. Obviously, this would
Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
To all Project Leads:
As was mentioned in a thread on the lfs-dev list, the server admins
would like to upgrade the version of Subversion on Belgarath. Being that
it's not a minor version upgrade, it is recommended by upstream devs to
dump and re-load the repositories
Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
At the least, we might very well be able to push out static content to
the mirrors with Wiki or Trac links back to the main site.
It may not be clear what I meant here. I meant have dynamically
generated 'static HTML' pages based on what is currently published in
the Wiki
M.Canales.es wrote:
I'm for option 1, but only if mirroring the website is feasible without need
to install additional software on the mirrors.
Yeah, you touched on option 1's weak spot. Still, we might be able to do
it. I'm going to look into some options there.
--
JH
--
Randy McMurchy wrote:
I'm just not real hip on the idea of Trac handling the web site or
the SVN repos (if that is an option).
So the weight has definitely shifted to number 2. Which is what I
expected, and is fine. Unless there are any other objections then, I
think we can safely say that
Greetings All:
Recent discussions on the blfs-dev list have shown that there is a
desire/need for a wiki once again. It would make adding and documenting
new information in BLFS about i18n and multilib a lot easier, especially
considering that the current editorial staff in BLFS are not (yet!)
Randy McMurchy wrote:
Please, offer some suggestions of what should be removed. I would
be against removing most, if not all. BLFS is a guide to installing
the various open source packages out there. It certainly is not
comprehensive, or even close to being all-inclusive. It is just a
helpful
Dan Nicholson wrote:
I hope this doesn't happen. One reason I love BLFS is there's a ton
of packages in the book. I like that if today I decided I was going
to install OpenLDAP on my box, I could go to the BLFS page and find a
set of known good build instructions. Anyone worth a lick is
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Sounds interesting. I took a quick look at the web site. Why don't you
go ahead and install a prototype system on anduin?
OK. Be forewarned that this may involve installing/updating some things
like Subversion and Python.
--
JH
--
Archaic wrote:
*Sigh*. I tried to emphasize my point in that the technology right now
Oh yeah? I'll give you something to sigh about...
/me dips Archaic's hands in maple syrup and tacks pages of 'War and
Peace' to them.
--
JH
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ:
Hey Guys:
Sorry for breaking threading on this. Writing this from my work PC...
Randy, the configure options you showed
(http://archives.linuxfromscratch.org/mail-archives/blfs-dev/2005-December/012572.html)
look good.
I just took a quick look at the about:buildconfig in the Windows binary
Randy McMurchy wrote:
In no way, shape or form am a trying to dismiss your suggestions
with the following comments. Know this right off the bat. However,
here are some thoughts.
Yep. That's all I wanted. Just some feedback. :)
--enable-application=browser is passed from the
In light of recent discussions, I have submitted a request to Mozilla
for permission to use their name and logos on the LiveCD. I included
URLs to the summary thread in BLFS so that they could see the set of
instructions we'll likely use with 1.5, and links to our current build
scripts.
Now
Hey Guys:
It's very possible that I'm misunderstanding something here, but I have
a question. In the Bash Shell Startup Files section, where we use the
umask script, there is this note:
Setting the umask value is important for security. Here the default
group write permissions are turned off for
Dan Nicholson wrote:
On 12/20/05, Jeremy Huntwork [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[snip]
However, if I'm reading the script correctly, this actually happens when
the user and group name *are* the same and it's an id above 99:
if [ $(id -gn) = $(id -un) -a $EUID -gt 99 ] ; then
umask 002
That's
Dan Nicholson wrote:
The wording's wrong, but earlier in /etc/profile, umask is set to 022.
So what I said in the second paragraph about how we're only gonna
change the group write permissions if non-system user and user name =
group name is more accurate. I probably should have deleted the
Randy McMurchy wrote:
Moot point, though, as we've already committed to using the client.mk
file to build the package. I'm not sure what your motive is in
even bringing it up.
Are you this suspicious of everyone. or just me? ;) I don't have a
hidden motive or agenda, Randy. I just wanted to
DJ Lucas wrote:
No, a sed to the _user's_ prefs.js will work fine (I didn't know this or
look into it, before posting my reply), but please don't make it a
default set of instructions. Wrap it with something to the effect of
If your [window manager || desktop suite] does not support defalut
Dan Nicholson wrote:
http://developer.mozilla.org/presentations/xtech2005/svg-canvas/
That was cool. :) I'm definitely going to have to look at this some more...
--
JH
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See
Archaic wrote:
Being paranoid like I am, I'm quite partial to 077 for all but root. :)
/me chomps down on a powdered donut next to Archaic's server, spraying
white mist into all the crevices. :D
Take that!
--
JH
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ:
Archaic wrote:
It's all fun and games until you lose a finger in my case fans. :)
Or a donut. :(
*sniff*
--
JH
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Randy McMurchy wrote:
# This option causes the installed binaries to have the official
# Firefox name embedded in them. Due to license restrictions, you
# may not distribute binaries created using this option.
Is that true? I didn't understand it that way, but we need to be certain
on this as
Randy McMurchy wrote:
It is absolutely, without-a-doubt *my* understanding of using the
--enable-official-branding option. I will see if I can't find my
source where I determined this to be fact, as I know you are keenly
interested in this.
Thanks... From some of their FAQs it seems that
Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
Thanks... From some of their FAQs it seems that they're being reasonable
on some of those points. If may come down to acquiring some sort of
license to use their logo/name.
http://www.mozilla.org/foundation/trademarks/faq.html
Can I distribute any of the Mozilla
Archaic wrote:
On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 12:26:57AM -0500, Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
If you want to distribute one of our products and this answer does
not apply to you, please say so explicitly in your trademark use
request, because otherwise you'll just get pointed at this FAQ entry
Randy McMurchy wrote:
Here is where Tush and I disagree with the direction the Recommended
dependencies has gone. Who decides what is basic/common features
expected by the users?
I choose Richard. :D
--
JH
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ:
Andrew Benton wrote:
Seems to me this is exactly the kind of thing that should be a
`Recommended' dependency. If someone has a printer and wants to use the
Gimp to prepare them then it makes sense to install gimp-print. On the
other hand if, they don't have a printer and will just be using
Justin R. Knierim wrote:
Isn't that suppost to be:
find man -name Makefile -exec sed -i '/groups/d' {} \;
Yep, that works. The '{}' stands for the file(s) found.
--
JH
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe:
Christian Bendele wrote:
Although I see the using that installer is not according to lfs
principles, and, thus, cannot be the main method used in blfs book, I
wonder If it might be possible to provide a short notice pointing to
those installers, so that lazy users might be spared the
Randy McMurchy wrote:
He's probably referring to:
http://os-cillation.de/index.php?id=31L=5
with the corresponding documentation:
http://www.os-works.com/documentation/xfce-installers/4.2.1/xfce-installer/
Ah. Thanks.
--
JH
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ:
Hey Guys,
As was brought up on the blfs-dev list recently, there is no 'official'
hint on how to create a LiveCD. I am curious what everyone thinks about
putting together a more complete LiveCD HowTo based generally on the
Official LiveCD.
Is there a need for this? Would it be useful? I'd
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Jeremy,
This is what I am proposing for BLFS right now:
[snip]
Does this seem reasonable?
Yes, I like it.
Except for one small nitpick. :) I'm not very fond of the term 'Boot CD'
any more, especially not for the CD we produce. It only says the CD can
boot, but
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
OK. How about:
paraIn addition, the LFS Community has developed its own CD-ROM
available at ulink url='http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/livecd/'/.
This LiveCD, in addition to booting and having rescue capabilities,
this CD is capable of building an entire LFS/BLFS system.
A
Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
paraIn addition, the LFS Community has developed its own LiveCD
available at ulink url='http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/livecd/'/. In
addition to booting and having rescue capabilities, it is capable of
building an entire LFS/BLFS system. A copy of this CD-ROM
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
OK. This is what I have now:
paraAlso, the LFS Community has developed its own LiveCD available at
ulink url='http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/livecd/'/. This LiveCD, in
addition to having boot and rescue capabilities, is capable of building
an entire LFS/BLFS system.
DJ Lucas wrote:
[snip]
HTH
Yes, thanks, it did, immensely. So the simple answer, for future
reference, is add these new string entries to about:config
network.protocol-handler.app.http firefox
network.protocol-handler.app.https firefox
Wish I had found this sooner... :/
--
JH
--
DJ Lucas wrote:
Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
network.protocol-handler.app.http firefox
network.protocol-handler.app.https firefox
Might also want an ftp handler if it's not there by default.
Right, thanks. :)
--
JH
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http
Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
A little clarification on what was meant, please.
No one has anything to say on this one?
--
JH
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Randy McMurchy wrote:
It's not that no one has anything to say, it is probably the fact
that the author of that text is the only one qualified to say
anything.
Alright, well thanks for that, Randy. That's better than no reply at all. :)
--
JH
--
Hi,
This is a *very* minor thing, but I thought I'd bring it up in case you
guys wanted to change it and hadn't noticed it.
On the gnome-menus page, towards the end, there is instructions to set
the variable XDG_CONFIG_DIRS like so:
XDG_CONFIG_DIRS=/etc/gnome/xdg
Everywhere else in the book
Hi,
There's a pretty major mistake in the current gnome-volume-manager
instructions. The current configure line is:
./configure `pkg-config --variable=prefix ORBit-2.0` \
--sysconfdir=/etc/gnome
Which will give you this output:
$ ./configure `pkg-config --variable=prefix
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
I've been going through BLFS and came to a minor issue with esound. The
instructions have the command:
install -v -m644 docs/esound.ps /usr/share/doc/esound-0.2.36
But the tarball I have (including a freshly downloaded one) does not
have the esound.ps file.
I saw that
On Tue, Dec 06, 2005 at 07:03:25AM -0600, Randy McMurchy wrote:
The configuration of Firefox is very similar to Mozilla-1.7.11 and
hence the options are not discussed. Refer to the Mozilla-1.7.11
instructions for explanations and additional configuration information.
To me, this is more
Randy McMurchy wrote:
Because no matter how you execute the configuration stage, you end
up with the *same exact* thing. I would have thought you knew that.
This is not intended to start an argument, but I really am just curious.
If in fact both methods do produce the same results, what is
On Mon, Dec 05, 2005 at 10:14:25PM -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
whether we need to do anything about it in BLFS. I could put in a note
that says to disable the show-all-if-ambiguous parameter in /etc/inputrc
if it is used, but LFS/BLFS doesn't mention this option otherwise (I
like it).
As you
Chris Staub wrote:
This was mentioned before -
http://linuxfromscratch.org/pipermail/blfs-support/2005-November/057624.html.
It seems the negotiateauth extension no longer exists.
Thanks. Missed that one.
--
JH
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ:
Randy McMurchy wrote:
I personally don't see the benefit. Automating LFS is one thing.
BLFS is a whole different animal. There are simply too many intangibles
that will have to be addressed: configuration, which package to use
when you have a required dependency of packageA or packageB,
Lennon Cook wrote:
Andrew Benton wrote:
If that's true that means you have a /share folder in your root folder and you
installed gnome with the --prefix=/
You misunderstand, I think (my fault - superfluous probably wasn't
quite the right word in retrospect). I meant that both lines should
DJ Lucas wrote:
Randy McMurchy wrote:
I feel our enabling of the
Bytecode Interpreter in the FreeType2 source *is* a violation of
Apple's patent.
Enabling it does, not telling how to enable it.
If enabling it does, then it becomes an issue for the LiveCD.
--
JH
--
Randy McMurchy wrote:
Make sense now?
Yes I understood that part from the original message. What I was
confused about was what you meant by creating a patch to go 'on top' of
the current coreutils patch. Did you mean that it would be editing that
current patch to always drop hostname or
Hi Guys:
I have a question. The which script provided as an alternative to Gnu
Which uses the syntax:
type -pa | head -n 1 ...
My question is, why do we pipe it through head so we can choose only the
first occurence when 'type -path' does the same thing? If it's a
portability thing, that
Tushar Teredesai wrote:
type -p has problems if the command is aliased to something.
OK, thanks for the tip. Is that a common occurence?
--
JH
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information
Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
Recent rsync apparently doesn't accept the '--compress' option anymore.
Removing it from the bootscript solves the issue. Not sure how to get
the functionality that option provided before...
Looking at this again, it seems that --compress is valid, just
Richard A Downing wrote:
Now I have it working, and all I did was to to mv the rules file
elsewhere and back again. This has me completely baffled :-)
Gremlins.
--
JH
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See
Randy McMurchy wrote:
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 10/25/05 11:16 CST:
I also don't really understand why udev is necessary for sound. Sound
cards are not something one normally plugs into the computer while power
is applied.
That would depend on how one defines sound card. When I
Richard A Downing wrote:
Is there a way of booting an iso without writing it to a CD? I have
several spare partitions, but ATM no CD writer.
R.
You *could*... but it would involve extracting the kernel from off the
iso, creating a custom init that wouldn't try to mount the CD but would
Randy McMurchy wrote:
Tushar, what is the harm in bootstrapping?
What's the point? You guys have always said that BLFS *expects* a
certain base of LFS. In fact you've got gcc4 patches now all over the
place in BLFS SVN because you *expect* that the user will have a
development version of
Randy McMurchy wrote:
Could you explain what you mean with blfs profiles?
Are you perhaps sending this message to blfs-dev when it should be
going to the alfs team?
I think you nailed it. I believe his message was meant for alfs-discuss.
--
JH
--
In case you guys weren't aware, although this link is valid, the patch
seems to be missing from the patches repo:
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/downloads/svn/thunderbird-1.0.6-fixes-1.patch
--
JH
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ:
Richard A Downing wrote:
Yes. I had already done this in my sandbox before you took on the bug.
So, I committed it and removed it. I figured that was the easiest
thing for me to do as once I did an svn add in my sandbox, I couldn't
remove it.
svm rm --force file
Might that have worked?
--
JH
Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
Richard A Downing wrote:
Yes. I had already done this in my sandbox before you took on the bug.
So, I committed it and removed it. I figured that was the easiest
thing for me to do as once I did an svn add in my sandbox, I couldn't
remove it.
svm rm --force file
Randy McMurchy wrote:
Jeremy Huntwork wrote these words on 09/05/05 15:29 CST:
svm rm --force file
[snip]
I probably should have researched the svn remove command and tried
the various options. Thanks for the tip!
No problem. Except that obviously I meant to say 'svn', not 'svm' ;) I
Randy McMurchy wrote:
Hi all,
I cannot get Samba-3.0.20 to build using GCC-4. The previous version
of Samba compiled just fine using GCC-4. I've tracked the problem to
$ /usr/sbin/smbd --version
Version 3.0.20
$ gcc --version
gcc (GCC) 4.0.1
Worked fine for me. I didn't see any errors when
On Wed, Aug 31, 2005 at 11:58:55PM -0500, Randy McMurchy wrote:
Jeremy Huntwork wrote these words on 08/31/05 23:50 CST:
The sed could be chopped down to:
sed -i 's|=$moz|\n run_moz=$dist_bin/mozilla.sh|' \
browser/app/mozilla.in
As best as I can tell, this will not work
On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 09:42:34PM +0200, M.Canales.es wrote:
http://www.macana-es.com/pruebas/blfs-book-xsl/index.html
If you are happy with that new look, I have the commit ready to go ;-)
+1 from me. That looks much cleaner and nicer.
--
JH
--
On Thu, Aug 25, 2005 at 09:37:15PM -0500, Randy McMurchy wrote:
And my apologies to you if you've taken anything I've said as an
insult to you. I don't mean to be course. Ever since my heart
attack 2 months ago, I am just a tad sour on life. I will work on
that.
Thanks for this note, Randy. I
Randy McMurchy wrote:
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 08/24/05 13:11 CST:
I like putting things into /opt too, but there have been several
comments about putting things into /usr/bin for other packages. For
example, xorg (from /usr/X11R6), qt (from /opt), and kde (from /opt).
Keep in mind
Subject says it all.
--
JH
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Randy McMurchy wrote:
What say the group?
It sounds alright, but if you're only providing links and not build
instructions, do you really need an entirely new section? Wouldn't one
page suffice?
--
JH
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ:
Randy McMurchy wrote:
In BLFSspeak, section = page.
Right. Thanks. ;)
--
JH
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 03:04:36PM -0400, David Fix wrote:
First off, what's CMMI? :D Secondly, I didn't do the cd gdb before I did
CMMI:
Centre for Molecular Microbiology and Infection
or maybe,
Capability Maturity Model Integration
but I'm pretty sure in this instance Randy means
Configure
Hi,
Am I recalling correctly that required dependencies listed in the BLFS
book are build dependencies and not runtime?
If that's the case, does the ppp page in SVN need to list libcap as a
required dependency? On the LiveCD we build ppp just fine without libcap
(and for all I know it works
Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
The build method is pretty stable and I would venture to guess doesn't
suffer from the same whitespace issue.
Just realized that of course you'd still have to be careful for
whitespace due to line-wrapping and presentation of the commands in the
BLFS book - wasn't
Randy McMurchy wrote:
Jeremy Huntwork wrote these words on 07/31/05 10:09 CST:
To be honest, the LiveCD build dropped the BLFS method a long time ago
in favor of the build-method that the mozilla site suggests using a
.mozconfig file and (approximately) the following commands:
Just
Randy McMurchy wrote:
Everyone responded that the CMMI works for them, why change things?
So it was left as a CMMI build.
Interesting. I don't recall that thread. I would have voted the other way.
--
JH
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ:
Tushar Teredesai wrote:
Hi:
I would like to propose that we add libpci.a during the installation
of pciutils. The following commands would accompolish that:
What are the benefits?
--
JH
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ:
Hi all,
Just noticed today that the BLFS development book is outdated with
respects to Subversion. Firstly, the url for 1.1.4 doesn't seem to be
valid any longer. Secondly, it seems they've released version 1.2.0.
(We're a little behind, looks like it was released on May 23rd) Going to
try
Gabriel Munoz wrote:
When you test subversion, can you check that the https protocol is
supported (run `svn --version | grep https').
I don't know if anyone else had problems, but I had issues with getting
v1.1.4 to support this protocol despite ssl's existence.
Well, that command you asked
Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
Gabriel Munoz wrote:
When you test subversion, can you check that the https protocol is
supported (run `svn --version | grep https').
Well, that command you asked me to run returns nothing. However,
checking out repos via ssh works fine (which, of course, uses ssl
David Jensen wrote:
Both are bz'd.
Sorry, guess I should have looked there before starting a new thread.
Will remember to look next time.
--
JH
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above
David Jensen wrote:
Then who would I talk to? Seriously, let us know if it works as
expected, I think we wanted some testing.
:) Well, built and running fine it seems. Of course, I only tested it
using these commands:
./configure --prefix=/usr --with-apr=/usr --with-apr-util=/usr
make
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Randy McMurchy wrote:
Here's the simplest sed my feeble mind can come up with using the
backreference method:
sed -i \
s:/\* \(#define TT_CONFIG_OPTION_BYTECODE_INTERPRETER\) \*/:\1: \
include/freetype/config/ftoption.h
or minimally:
sed -i
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
This may be an exception, Randy. X uses fontconfig whuch requires
freetype. It's a bit harder to do cut and paste before X is built.
Personally, I would rather use vi to edit the file than type in a really
long sed that only applies to one file. :)
I think I agree. If
Greg Schafer wrote:
sed -i.bak \
-e '/def.*BYTE/s,^/\* ,,' \
-e '/def.*BYTE/s, \*/$,,' \
include/freetype/config/ftoption.h
Tho' there is probably a better way...
Not sure if it's better, but it's shorter:
sed -i '[EMAIL PROTECTED]/\* \(.*BYTE.*\) \*/@\1@' \
David Jensen wrote:
The order is not important.
echo TT_CONFIG_OPTION_BYTECODE_INTERPRETER \
include/freetype/config/ftoption.h
Yes, I thought about that too, however, I figured we should be able to
find a shorter command with a sed, and I believe I did. :) Of, course,
which way the book
101 - 200 of 208 matches
Mail list logo
