Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 03/14/10 11:41 CST:
ftp://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs/cmd_tars-oct_09/acl-2.2.49.src.tar.gz
No such directory
Yeah, I know. It should be on the SGI site soon enough. The HTML
link works, so it's not like it cannot be downloaded. Before we release
BLFS-6.5 I
Hi all,
I would like to update the book to version 1.0.6 of libusb. Has anyone
had any problems with this version, or know anything that keeps us from
updating the package? It built fine for me, but I'm not sure I use anything
that accesses the built package. Updated usbutils-0.86 built and works
Hi all,
I would like to update the book to version 1.2.20 of D-Bus and version
0.5.14 of HAL (D-Bus bindings to current versions as well. Has anyone
had any problems with these versions, or know anything that keeps us from
updating the packages? They build fine for me, but I'm not sure I use
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 03/12/10 12:22 CST:
The most current version that I've built is 1.0.2. I can't say I've had
any problems, but the only usb devices I've used is the mouse and the
keyboard.
Just out of curiosity, but I'm thinking to myself Bruce doesn't use
USB flash drives,
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 03/12/10 13:02 CST:
As a note, ps is now printing a uid instead of the name if the name is
too long. Changing the names s/haldaemon/hald/ and s/messagebus/msgbus/
in /etc/passwd provides the user name.
That has been standard behavior for years and years. I
Hi all,
This is mainly to Bruce, but if anyone remembers a discussion
about this, please speak up. In the OpenSSH instructions, in
changeset r7665, the following was removed (commit by Bruce):
sed -i 's@ -ldes@@' configure amp;amp;
and its accompanying explanation:
paracommandsed -i 's@
Hi all,
I believe I have all the kinks worked out for a clean build of Live Tex,
which would end up replacing the deprecated teTeX. It is a beast; however,
the biggest resource hog I've seen (disk space wise, anyway).
The only thing that might stand in our way right now is the sources ship
in
DJ Lucas wrote these words on 02/28/10 13:46 CST:
Actually, that is not true. We did not have a plan for a stable release
AFAIK. I've been building against 6.5+.
It had been mentioned a month(s) or more ago that this was the intent.
Things just got really slow while Wayne was updating GNOME.
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 02/23/10 09:56 CST:
There is a lot of confusion bu users about 'stable' BLFS. Should we
move it to the museum and only point to the -dev version on the web site?
I suppose we need to do something. I will get this done today or this
evening.
--
Randy
William Immendorf wrote these words on 02/23/10 13:44 CST:
Well, this is just my opion, but I want to wait until LFS 6.6 gets
released and then release BLFS 6.6. That's just my idea.
Well, what is going to happen is a BLFS-6.5. LFS release cycles are
simply too often for us to keep up. Right
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 02/19/10 22:35 CST:
324 tests OK.
1 test failed:
test_distutils
This is a known isssu. Python upstream claims it is a problem with
another upstream package (coreutils?).
test_urllib2_localnet and test_tcl worked for me.
Not sure about the urllib2 test,
DJ Lucas wrote these words on 02/20/10 01:38 CST:
## BEGINING TESTSUITE ##
running build
running build_ext
INFO: Can't locate Tcl/Tk libs and/or headers
^[[?1034h
Failed to find the necessary bits to build these modules:
_bsddb _sqlite3 _tkinter
William Immendorf wrote these words on 02/19/10 16:24 CST:
Trying the instructions in the book (with a LFS 6.6-rc1 base system),
using make -f unix/Makefile linux, on a 64bit Core 2 Duo 2.4ghz
system, I get stopped at the near beginning with these errors:
Bruce, if you can confirm this (I know
Dan Nicholson wrote these words on 02/19/10 18:11 CST:
It probably just means that it won't use assembly. There's probably
some tuned x86 assembly code for doing the decompression, which
wouldn't work on x86_64.
That's what I figured. I'll make a ticket so the issue isn't forgotten. I
think
Hi all,
Not sure if this is a -dev issue or what but I recently built an LFS-6.5
machine. Everything smooth as silk, other than 3 tests in the gcc suite
and 4 in the mudflap suite. Everything else perfect.
I'm encountering errors in recent packages I'm building. For example in
Python I get:
Hi all,
Mostly to DJ, FYI for everyone else. Especially for Dan out there lurking!
What is the state of the current Xorg installation in BLFS?
Is it close to what is going to be released in BLFS-6.5?
Will there be significant changes that would cause incompatibilities
with the current Xorg
DJ Lucas wrote these words on 02/07/10 15:05 CST:
Here is the initial view of core and desktop...
Not to make it troublesome, but would it take much to create a diff of
that vs. trunk?
It is actually easier for me to review changes, than look at completed
pages.
I'll be getting into things a
Matthew Burgess wrote these words on 01/16/10 10:11 CST:
Is there a reason particular reason why this line:
install -v -m755 $NSS_LINUXDIR/bin/nss-config /usr/bin
only installs nss-config and isn't, for example:
install -v -m755 $NSS_LINUXDIR/bin/* /usr/bin
The reason I ask is that
DJ Lucas wrote these words on 10/24/09 10:52 CST:
On 10/24/2009 04:30 AM, Lars Bamberger wrote:
On my system I created some compatibility symlinks:
$GNOME_PREFIX/share/icons - /usr/share/icons
$GNOME_PREFIX/share/pixmaps - /usr/share/pixmaps
$GNOME_PREFIX/python$PYTHON_VERSION -
Wayne Blaszczyk wrote:
Has anyone got any objections to split the D-Bus Bindings packages into
their own individual pages? Reason, less clutter on an individual page.
eggdbus is another D-Bus binding package.
Well, since you are soliciting opinions, I'd prefer they all
stay on one page, but I
David Jensen wrote:
I'm wondering 'why all the fuss', there are tons of things that could
be added or should be updated.
Precisely. I just hope to be able to start contributing soon.
--
Randy
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ:
DJ Lucas wrote:
This is a long outstanding bug. A desirable one IMO, but it really
comes down to who uses what...
It looks like the following packages need to be removed for this to
happen: GTK-1, GDK, XMMS, Dillo, Gnome Print-1, Guppi, Gal-1, and
GTK-HTML-1
Imlib-1, and GConf-1 will
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
When reviewing the instructions for PAM, I see we are moving the libraries
from
/lib to /usr/lib. Why? Surely we need the PAM libraries to be available if
/usr is not mounted.
Look closer. The libraries required for PAM are not moved. What are
moved are the .so and .la
Wayne Blaszczyk wrote:
Ok, I got the shutdown/restart to work from gdm after installing
gnome-power-management.
Now the question remains, which section should this belong too? core or
additional? Also, I always felt that gdm should be core as well.
Anyone got any thought or suggestions on
Wayne Blaszczyk wrote these words on 09/02/09 07:08 CST:
Hi,
I notice there is an inconsistency in the use of either 'Required Patch'
or 'Required patch' among the packages. Which form should we be using?
or does it not matter?
Regards,
Wayne.
I thought I had fixed all these at one time. Oh
Hi all,
This is a note to the Dev's, and FYI for everyone else. I've noticed
this more and more lately that y'all are listing dependencies as
recommended, with no explanation or clue as to why.
I've mentioned this before in a couple of posts over in -book and
was ignored. I think it is important
Randy McMurchy wrote these words on 08/29/09 08:39 CST:
I will go through the book today and find all packages that have
recommended dependencies and evaluate them. If they are not identified
why it is recommended, I'll reply to this post. This needs to be
cleaned up, I'll start the process
Randy McMurchy wrote these words on 08/29/09 08:39 CST:
I will go through the book today and find all packages that have
recommended dependencies and evaluate them. If they are not identified
why it is recommended, I'll reply to this post. This needs to be
cleaned up, I'll start the process
DJ Lucas wrote these words on 08/29/09 09:48 CST:
Will fix nss in a moment. Simple addition.
Care to discuss why it is recommended?
--
Randy
rmlscsi: [bogomips 1003.28] [GNU ld version 2.16.1] [gcc (GCC) 4.0.3]
[GNU C Library stable release version 2.3.6] [Linux 2.6.14.3 i686]
10:02:01 up
Guy Dalziel wrote these words on 08/29/09 10:24 CST:
If they have OpenSSL installed then Links will automatically pick it up,
but if not then it's not for us to force them to install it.
Exactly. I am guilty of putting in Recommended dependencies for packages
that probably don't need it. That's
DJ Lucas wrote these words on 08/29/09 10:13 CST:
I read that as if you are suggesting that we remove recommended
dependencies all together.
No, we absolutely need it. For exactly the type of case you present.
For example you
cited earlier NSS. If you have sqlite3 installed, and use the
DJ Lucas wrote these words on 08/29/09 11:20 CST:
Randy McMurchy wrote:
My take is that Recommended is actually wrong here. I think the proper
syntax should be:
bridgehead renderas=sect4Required/bridgehead
para role=requiredxref linkend=gpm/ (if mouse support is
desired
Wayne Blaszczyk wrote:
Hi,
Has anyone got any objections if I do the following changes:
Do these changes coincide with actual changes GNOME made in
their desktop/platform packaging, or your personal opinions?
(Sorry about being so lazy to not check myself)
--
Randy
--
Guy Dalziel wrote these words on 08/05/09 10:53 CST:
In a recent discussion it was debated whether or not there is any real
difference between option and parameter. Parameter places a slight
emphasis on the parameter, while option does not. Docbook states
Hi all,
I'll be out of town and offline for a few days (probably until the end
of the weekend). I'll see if I can't hit Gmane to stay up with things,
but no promises.
Have a good week and week-end!
--
Randy
rmlscsi: [bogomips 1003.25] [GNU ld version 2.16.1] [gcc (GCC) 4.0.3]
[GNU C Library
Hi all,
This is mostly to the devs (Guy), but FYI for anyone else:
1. If you have JasPer installed on your system and you would like to
use it with GPL Ghostscript, then we must first remove the local copy
and apply a patch:
Who is we? We try not to use this is the book unless it is something
Wayne Blaszczyk wrote these words on 08/02/09 00:04 CST:
Hi,
I've noticed that the GConf installation places the
org.gnome.GConf.Defaults.conf file into
/etc/gnome/version/dbus-1/system.d. I don't know enough on how dbus
works, but I presume it needs to go into /etc/dbus-1/system.d. Is this
Guy Dalziel wrote these words on 08/02/09 10:07 CST:
GPL Ghostscript provides many different scripts used to convert
PostScript, PDF, and other formats. Please refer to the HTML
documentation or the man pages for information about the capabilities
provided.
Sounds fine to me.
--
Randy
Hi all,
I would like to publicly acknowledge the fine work being done by the two
newest Editors on the BLFS team, Guy and Wayne. Not only are they
contributing massive commits to the book, the commits themselves are
accurate, articulate and complete. It's as if these two have been doing
it for
Hi all,
There is an entity in the book named gnome-version;. It is the major
part of a GNOME release. In the case of the current book it is 2.18.
We use this entity quite a bit in the URLs of GNOME packages. Wayne
is busy updating all the preliminary packages for GNOME. Most GNOME
support
Guy Dalziel wrote these words on 07/29/09 14:22 CST:
Do we know what version of Xorg we're goint to use yet? I'm assuming it
will be all the latest stuff. If I'm going to compile stuff against it,
then I'll need to have some idea of what we're going to use.
Well, seeing how the book is at 7.4
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 07/29/09 10:52 CST:
Create a gnome-target entity and use that until all the packages use it and
then
do a sed s/target/version/ when appropriate.
As always, good plan, Bruce.
I'm not sure what you want to comment out. There are many packages that
Guy Dalziel wrote these words on 07/29/09 16:31 CST:
The reason I ask is because I didn't find 7.4 incredibly stable. I've
built X exactly as specified before and it crashed when I loaded it up.
Xorg server 1.6, however - or pre-7.5, rather - was very stable, and
worked as advertised.
Well,
Wayne Blaszczyk wrote these words on 07/29/09 16:36 CST:
I was actually think along the same lines as Bruce, to have two entities
(old and new). My suggestion would be the following:
gnome-version = 2.26 and gnome-old-version = 2.18, then sed everything
to gnome-old-version first. The
Guy Dalziel wrote these words on 07/29/09 17:00 CST:
Most of the stuff in X hasn't been touched in years, so you're not
really dealing with anything too unpredictable.
7.4 was released in September of last year. Seemed to me there were
lots of changes (some subtle, some not so subtle). I'm
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 07/29/09 10:52 CST:
Create a gnome-target entity and use that until all the packages use it and
then
do a sed s/target/version/ when appropriate.
Okay. I made some changes to the gnome-version entity. Here's what I did:
1. First found some instances of
This is for the devs:
I've created an entity called lfs65_checked. When inserted into a file,
it will show that the package works with LFS-6.5. See the ATK page for an
example.
Let's start using it as packages are proved to work against 6.5
--
Randy
rmlscsi: [bogomips 1003.25] [GNU ld version
Randy McMurchy wrote these words on 07/26/09 09:36 CST:
This is for the devs:
I've created an entity called lfs65_checked. When inserted into a file,
it will show that the package works with LFS-6.5. See the ATK page for an
example.
Let's start using it as packages are proved to work
Matthew Burgess wrote these words on 07/26/09 15:47 CST:
And I probably have never used them! Anyway, now that my main barrier to
entry of
make sure all dependant packages work following a package update has been
lifted,
I may well go all gung-ho following LFS-6.5-RC2 and start actually
Randy McMurchy wrote these words on 07/26/09 16:14 CST:
However, please try to install as many dependencies of the package
you are updating as possible. At least common and/or important and/or
ones you think most folks will install.
That way, we'll know those dependencies don't break
DJ Lucas wrote these words on 07/25/09 08:48 CST:
We absolutely need a way to track the pages that have been touched by a
quick glance approach.
I disagree. I will go through every package and either update Trac or
add packages to it as I discover they are out of date. We'll use the Trac
Randy McMurchy wrote these words on 07/25/09 09:03 CST:
Yes, I don't want to update pages in the book saying it works with
such and such. Let's just use Trac. I will ensure each package is
accounted for.
Please keep in mind that even though I've said I can't promise to do
any updates, doesn't
Randy McMurchy wrote these words on 07/25/09 09:10 CST:
Please keep in mind that even though I've said I can't promise to do
any updates, doesn't mean I'm not building up a 6.5 box.
But I'm going to wait until there is a real package freeze for 6.5.
Which I believe means waiting until
Hi all,
After thinking about this, and due to the community's desire to see
something about this, I am proposing the following:
As BLFS packages are built on top of an LFS-6.5 system, insert the
following between the description of the package and the sect3 Package
Information.
paraThis package
Nathan Coulson wrote these words on 07/25/09 14:12 CST:
I noted that libogg/libvorbis install static libraries by default. Some of
the packages have the --disable-static keyword mentioned when you have the
option of not installing static libraries.
In regards to not installing static
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 07/25/09 16:42 CST:
I thought we might have a series of entities:
lfs65checked;
lfs70checked;
And then turn them on or off as desired.
Again, good plan.
--
Randy
rmlscsi: [bogomips 1003.25] [GNU ld version 2.16.1] [gcc (GCC) 4.0.3]
[GNU C Library
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 07/25/09 16:07 CST:
general.ent:
!ENTITY lfs65check paraThis package is known to build and work properly
using an LFS-6.5 platform./para
In fact, we may even need two entities for 6.5. One similar to the above
and another to indicate that the current
CC'ing BLFS-Support as this thread is more appropriate there, please
respond in that forum. Thanks.
Tobias Gasser wrote these words on 07/25/09 18:13 CST:
mod_ruby-1.3.0 states supported ruby 1.9 experimentally
I don't use Ruby so I cannot help any. However, what did Google spit
out? I'm trying
Tobias Gasser wrote these words on 07/24/09 15:51 CST:
[snip fairly useful, but nothing that we would do, information]
i don't want to offend anybody, and i really appreciate the work all the
authors are doeing. but the current state of the book is just [censored]
And after this comment, I
Randy McMurchy wrote these words on 07/24/09 16:28 CST:
[snip getting ugly stuff]
Tobias has sent a personal apology via email to me. His apology is
accepted. He made good points in his post. In fact, the BDB rejection
may have been a bit steep by Guy. But let's get past all that.
BLFS
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 07/24/09 18:03 CST:
I think we do need to mark each package with some sort of indication about
when
it was last reviewed. We do have a Last updated on: tag, but that's not
always
the best indication because it is automatically updated for things like
Wayne Blaszczyk wrote these words on 07/23/09 06:40 CST:
I do have one question. How do I change the status of a Trac ticket?
I don't see any options/buttons to change either the status or owner,
etc. I only see one radio button in the Action section, leave as new.
I have established you as
Guy Dalziel wrote these words on 07/23/09 07:54 CST:
Addendum.
I just noticed that this issue was discussed 5 months ago, I believe it
was decided to wait and see. 5 months is a long time for something to
be broken without someone noticing it, and so I think it's time to change
the ftp
Wayne Blaszczyk wrote these words on 07/23/09 08:30 CST:
I didn't know I had a LFS email address. I've been using my own created
account, wblaszcz.
I've tried logging on as wblas...@linuxfromscratch.org with no success.
I've tried a blank password, and both original and new password for
Wayne Blaszczyk wrote these words on 07/23/09 08:51 CST:
I've already have my own account, 'wblaszcz'.
Try now using the above account. I did not realize you already had one.
It should work now.
--
Randy
rmlscsi: [bogomips 1003.25] [GNU ld version 2.16.1] [gcc (GCC) 4.0.3]
[GNU C Library
Guy Dalziel wrote:
I just noticed that this issue was discussed 5 months ago, I believe it
was decided to wait and see. 5 months is a long time for something to
be broken without someone noticing it, and so I think it's time to change
the ftp value.
Here's one that works:
Hi all,
I'd like to announce that Wayne Blaszczyk has accepted a position as a BLFS
Editor. Wayne has recently been sending in patches for the BLFS book to add
new packages.
Wayne will make a fine addition to the BLFS team and I encourage everyone
to welcome him as the newest addition to the
Wayne Blaszczyk wrote these words on 07/21/09 08:31 CST:
Hi,
I've created a new package for libunique and have attached the diff file
to ticket 2870. This library will be a requirement for nautilus 2.26.
Thanks Wayne. Just so you know, there are entities for the gnome download
locations, so I
CC'ing BLFS-Dev because that is where this discussion now belongs.
Please respond there.
Mike McCarty wrote these words on 07/21/09 14:17 CST:
Thanks for the replies, Bruce and Randy. I am not complaining,
merely observing. I did offer to do some help with the dev
team, if nothing else then
Ken Moffat wrote:
We could easily put in another line:
Last built and tested with LFS version 6.5
immediately above or below the date stamp.
I'm not really a fan of doing anything different than what we've
been doing. I'm really against a branch for 6.4, as there is
simply nobody that
Wayne Blaszczyk wrote these words on 07/17/09 21:57 CST:
The reason for the CONFIGPARMS was to give the end user an easier way of
cutting and pasting all the optional parameters during the build. Maybe
the single option --enable-gtk-doc didn't show the benefit. I've
attached a libgtop example
Matthew Burgess wrote these words on 07/18/09 10:05 CST:
The Linux From Scratch community is pleased to announce the release of
LFS Version 6.5 Release Candidate 1.
[snip]
It is our intention to release LFS-6.5 final within 2 weeks.
My personal opinion is that is too aggressive of a timeline,
krendosha...@dementedfury.org wrote these words on 07/18/09 11:14 CST:
I think the nature of SVN versions is that it's constantly changing. I've
always been under the assumption that BLFS-SVN builds according to
LFS-SVN, rather than building against a specific version.
No, it has never been
Ken Moffat wrote these words on 07/18/09 11:20 CST:
OTOH, I don't have any gcc-4.4 systems, and building one will
definitely not be a priority - I need to update my own desktop, and
I figure that will be a lot easier if I stick with gcc-4.3 for the first
attempt. So, if BLFS-dev has to be
Randy McMurchy wrote these words on 07/18/09 12:02 CST:
krendosha...@dementedfury.org wrote these words on 07/18/09 11:14 CST:
I think the nature of SVN versions is that it's constantly changing. I've
always been under the assumption that BLFS-SVN builds according to
LFS-SVN, rather than
Ken Moffat wrote these words on 07/18/09 11:20 CST:
So, if BLFS-dev has to be suitable for LFS-6.5 then I am
ruled out of it until the autumn.
Don't worry about that Ken. To be honest, I don't think we have the
manpower to get a BLFS release out the door regardless what target
environment we
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 07/18/09 14:58 CST:
Randy McMurchy wrote:
Isn't a 32bit platform becoming almost obsolete anyway?
What applications or hardware do you have that require more than 32 bits?
That is not what I was driving at. Can you even go out and buy a 32bit
Intel/AMD
Ken Moffat wrote these words on 07/18/09 15:48 CST:
2009/7/18 Randy McMurchy ra...@linuxfromscratch.org:
Ken Moffat wrote these words on 07/18/09 11:20 CST:
So, if BLFS-dev has to be suitable for LFS-6.5 then I am
ruled out of it until the autumn.
Don't worry about that Ken.
Don't worry
I've never built Mutt, so anyone that does could help out a bit. I'm
in the process of commenting out all the references to GDBM in the book.
What I did on the Mutt page was change --disable-gdbm to --enable-gdbm.
So now there is both --enable-gdbm and --enable-bdb. Does this do any harm?
--
Wayne Blaszczyk wrote:
Howdy folks,
I thought I might contribute something to this project after using
LFS/BLFS for several years now.
I've created a new page for liboil and have attached the diff file to
ticket 2820. Let me know if this is the correct way of submitting things.
Sorry it has
For some reason, this message was bounced by the Quantum server.
Perhaps it was in HTML, I don't know. Anyway, I happen to see it
and thought it belonged so I'm forwarding it.
I'll reply after it is posted
Original Message
Subject: Question about new contributers
Date: Thu, 16
Wayne Blaszczyk wrote:
I made a post 3 days ago to the blfs-dev mailing list in regards to a
new package that I created as per the 'Getting Involved' section, and I
notice that no one has responded or done anything about it.
Sorry about that. I'm really busy and I suppose the others are as
Randy McMurchy wrote these words on 07/16/09 08:42 CST:
Sorry it has taken a couple of days to get back to you. I looked
at your patch and it seems very good. The description of liboil is
a bit vague, and I don't understand why you used the CONFIGPARMS
instead of just adding --prefix=/usr
Randy McMurchy wrote these words on 07/16/09 09:06 CST:
Wayne Blaszczyk wrote:
I
think that it would be disappointing if non-editor submissions would
take weeks to merge/commit in if at all. I've also notice at least one
other ticket where a patch was provided 6 months ago (libtasn1) and yet
Randy McMurchy wrote these words on 07/16/09 09:19 CST:
Randy McMurchy wrote these words on 07/16/09 08:42 CST:
Sorry it has taken a couple of days to get back to you. I looked
at your patch and it seems very good. The description of liboil is
a bit vague, and I don't understand why you used
Randy McMurchy wrote these words on 07/16/09 09:19 CST:
One other thing. Until you have SVN write privileges, you don't need
to update the ChangeLog or general.ent, as those files may have changed
before your patch is applied making the patch not apply cleanly.
Let me clarify. What I meant
Wayne Blaszczyk wrote:
I thought I might contribute something to this project after using
LFS/BLFS for several years now.
I've created a new page for liboil and have attached the diff file to
ticket 2820. Let me know if this is the correct way of submitting things.
One other thing, Wayne. If
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 07/14/09 00:25 CST:
BLFS is woefully out of date. HAL-0.5.9.1 is two years old.
I've cc'd -dev so please respond to this email to that list.
I will take responsibility for BLFS being so out-of-date. HAL was my
very next update to do before things have just
Hi all,
I'd like to announce that Guy Dalziel has accepted a position as a BLFS
Editor. Guy has been regularly contributing to the various LFS mailing
lists as well as sending in patches for the BLFS book.
Guy will make a fine addition to the BLFS team and I encourage everyone
to welcome him as
Guy Dalziel wrote:
The mutt page mentions the use of GnuPG 2, however it fails to mention
the need for gpg2 to be symlinked to gpg in order for the imported
commands to work. The attached patch corrects this.
We need to work out better text for the patch. Not addressed is
the situation where
William Immendorf wrote these words on 03/22/09 11:20 CST:
A while back, I made some patches to patch BLFS to use GPL Ghostscript
8.64, and you (yes, I'm talking to you, Bruce) ignored them. Now, I'm
resending them, hoping you will use them.
Not sure why you're talking to Bruce as I own the
Thomas Trepl wrote these words on 03/21/09 07:40 CST:
Hiho,
in chapter Root Certificates there is a text saying that the certs should
be placed in /etc/ssl/certs.
The following instructions do install them in /etc/ssl.
What's correct?
What is shown on both the certs page and the
DJ Lucas wrote these words on 03/21/09 09:17 CST:
Thomas, that is a recent addition to the book. /etc/ssl/certs used to
be the default CAPath for OpenSSL. The correct logical place, in my
opinion, is /etc/ssl. I'll update the text in a bit.
To me, it makes more sense to put them in
Randy McMurchy wrote:
To me, it makes more sense to put them in /etc/ssl/certs. Why do we want
to change this? Has the default CApath variable in the ssl library actually
changed?
In fact, the OpenSSL docs say to use a /some/where/certs directory.
Perhaps you can (should) reconsider your
Dan Nicholson wrote these words on 03/02/09 23:01 CST:
You're looking for python setup.py install --root=$DESTDIR.
Thanks Dan. That was helpful. :-)
--
Randy
rmlscsi: [bogomips 1003.24] [GNU ld version 2.16.1] [gcc (GCC) 4.0.3]
[GNU C Library stable release version 2.3.6] [Linux 2.6.14.3
Hi all,
I'd like to get some input on a question I have, and perhaps comments
from others that have used SQLite in real situations.
Because SQLite is a serverless SQL database system, I really don't
see the need to create user/group ownership of a database as we do
with MySQL and PostGreSQL.
Hi all,
I've not tried real hard yet, but I'm stumbling a bit on how to figure
out how to use DESTDIR in native python packages that use the syntax
'python setup.py' for installation.
Does anyone have a quick solution to this?
--
Randy
rmlscsi: [bogomips 1003.24] [GNU ld version 2.16.1] [gcc
Ken Moffat wrote these words on 02/25/09 14:01 CST:
On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 06:32:56PM -0600, Randy McMurchy wrote:
See above. And this is how we do it in most of the BLFS packages
where a dependency is soley used to build a sub-part of the package
that nothing else in the book depends
Matthew Burgess wrote these words on 02/28/09 17:00 CST:
Just to let you know that trying to build libusb-compat early on
in a BLFS build fails (hard fail in ./configure) if pkg-config
isn't installed.
I'll fix this right now. This situation with pkg-config is just
going to get worse and
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 02/28/09 19:33 CST:
While I'm not completely against putting pkg-config in LFS, we could also put
it
into Chapter 3 of BLFS, 'After LFS Configuration Issues'.
It wouldn't surprise me if some LFS package looks for pkg-config in the
near future. At that time,
201 - 300 of 1752 matches
Mail list logo
