Le 26/02/2014 01:47, Randy McMurchy a écrit :
On 2/25/2014 5:26 PM, Armin K. wrote:
On 25.2.2014 23:54, Randy McMurchy wrote:
Though I strongly disagree with your decision to remove the docs,
the more important part of your commit is removing the work done
by another editor without
On 2014-02-25 17:43, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
That said, I don't have strong opinions about whether it is in the book
or not. We may want to review it in a few days as we sort out other
areas.
I don't want sendmail back in the book as I believe it's rated worse in
performance and security not to
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 13:47:05 +0100
From: Igor ??ivkovi?? cont...@igor-zivkovic.from.hr
To: BLFS Development List blfs-dev@linuxfromscratch.org
Subject: Re: [blfs-dev] discussion about sendmail
On 2014-02-26 13:45, Igor ??ivkovi?? wrote:
On 2014-02-25 17:43, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
That
- like for the recent sendmail stuff, is the following the sort of thing
that should really go through '-dev' first:
Ref: http://wiki.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/ticket/4724
--
Lots of packages use valgrind. We ought to add it to the book.
Wouldn't normally such a discussion take
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 15:38:59 +0100
From: Igor ??ivkovi?? cont...@igor-zivkovic.from.hr
To: BLFS Development List blfs-dev@linuxfromscratch.org
Subject: Re: [blfs-dev] discussion about sendmail
On 2014-02-26 15:24, lf...@cruziero.com wrote:
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 13:47:05 +0100
From:
On 2014-02-26 15:53, lf...@cruziero.com wrote:
And as asked clearly: the references are ... , what, where?
Go to your favorite search engine, type sendmail vs postfix vs exim, and
enjoy the read.
Not even the fairly simple effort of seeing what other distros do - as
is
done for much in
On 26/02/2014 17:00, Igor Živković wrote:
On 2014-02-26 15:53, lf...@cruziero.com wrote:
And as asked clearly: the references are ... , what, where?
Go to your favorite search engine, type sendmail vs postfix vs exim, and
enjoy the read.
There is ton's of FUD regarding sendmail previous
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 16:00:19 +0100
From: Igor ??ivkovi?? cont...@igor-zivkovic.from.hr
To: BLFS Development List blfs-dev@linuxfromscratch.org
Subject: Re: [blfs-dev] discussion about sendmail
On 2014-02-26 15:53, lf...@cruziero.com wrote:
And as asked clearly: the references are ...
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 17:08:38 +0200
From: Gregory H. Nietsky gregniet...@gmail.com
To: blfs-dev@linuxfromscratch.org
Subject: Re: [blfs-dev] discussion about sendmail
On 26/02/2014 17:00, Igor ??ivkovi?? wrote:
On 2014-02-26 15:53, lf...@cruziero.com wrote:
And as asked clearly: the
On 26/02/2014 11:29, Pierre Labastie wrote:
Maybe, when there is more time, we could start a related discussion
about having optional instructions in the book not distinct in any way
from mandatory ones. As you may remember, I use some kind of automation
for testing the book. If optional
On 2014-02-26 16:28, lf...@cruziero.com wrote:
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 16:00:19 +0100
From: Igor ??ivkovi?? cont...@igor-zivkovic.from.hr
To: BLFS Development List blfs-dev@linuxfromscratch.org
Subject: Re: [blfs-dev] discussion about sendmail
On 2014-02-26 15:53, lf...@cruziero.com wrote:
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 16:58:22 +0100
From: Igor ??ivkovi?? cont...@igor-zivkovic.from.hr
To: BLFS Development List blfs-dev@linuxfromscratch.org
Subject: Re: [blfs-dev] discussion about sendmail
On 2014-02-26 16:28, lf...@cruziero.com wrote:
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 16:00:19 +0100
From:
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 16:58:22 +0100
From: Igor ??ivkovi?? cont...@igor-zivkovic.from.hr
To: BLFS Development List blfs-dev@linuxfromscratch.org
Subject: Re: [blfs-dev] discussion about sendmail
.
.
I bothered enough with it to remove it from the book. If someone else
On 2014-02-26 17:20, lf...@cruziero.com wrote:
Yes, as I suspected: you're bs'ing.
That's funny because mostly everything I have ever seen from you (and I
don't even know your real name) around here is bullshit, flaming
incitement and rudeness. Anyways, I'm dumping you just like sendmail.
Le 26/02/2014 16:54, Gregory H. Nietsky a écrit :
On 26/02/2014 11:29, Pierre Labastie wrote:
Maybe, when there is more time, we could start a related discussion
about having optional instructions in the book not distinct in any way
from mandatory ones. As you may remember, I use some kind of
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 17:29:32 +0100
From: Igor ??ivkovi?? cont...@igor-zivkovic.from.hr
To: BLFS Development List blfs-dev@linuxfromscratch.org
Subject: Re: [blfs-dev] discussion about sendmail
On 2014-02-26 17:20, lf...@cruziero.com wrote:
Yes, as I suspected: you're bs'ing.
That's
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 05:54:18PM +0200, Gregory H. Nietsky wrote:
There is something that is often overlooked that there are individuals
who use the book as a reference to get the low down on a individual
package.
if these are place common distro here users or simply experimenting
with
Igor Živković wrote:
On 2014-02-25 17:43, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
That said, I don't have strong opinions about whether it is in the book
or not. We may want to review it in a few days as we sort out other
areas.
I don't want sendmail back in the book as I believe it's rated worse in
Igor Živković wrote:
On 2014-02-26 17:20, lf...@cruziero.com wrote:
Yes, as I suspected: you're bs'ing.
That's funny because mostly everything I have ever seen from you (and I
don't even know your real name) around here is bullshit, flaming
incitement and rudeness. Anyways, I'm dumping you
akhiezer wrote:
- like for the recent sendmail stuff, is the following the sort of thing
that should really go through '-dev' first:
Ref: http://wiki.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/ticket/4724
--
Lots of packages use valgrind. We ought to add it to the book.
Wouldn't normally
I had a problem with the instructions for Cyrus SASL. Using them as
they are in the book gives me:
gcc -shared -fPIC -DPIC .libs/sasldb.o .libs/sasldb_init.o
.libs/plugin_common.o -Wl,--whole-archive ../sasldb/.libs/libsasldb.a
-Wl,--no-whole-archive -ldb -lresolv -O2 -Wl,-soname
On 02/26/2014 09:34 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
I had a problem with the instructions for Cyrus SASL. Using them as
they are in the book gives me:
gcc -shared -fPIC -DPIC .libs/sasldb.o .libs/sasldb_init.o
.libs/plugin_common.o -Wl,--whole-archive ../sasldb/.libs/libsasldb.a
On 02/26/2014 09:46 PM, Armin K. wrote:
On 02/26/2014 09:34 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
I had a problem with the instructions for Cyrus SASL. Using them as
they are in the book gives me:
gcc -shared -fPIC -DPIC .libs/sasldb.o .libs/sasldb_init.o
.libs/plugin_common.o -Wl,--whole-archive
Armin K. wrote:
On 02/26/2014 09:46 PM, Armin K. wrote:
On 02/26/2014 09:34 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
I had a problem with the instructions for Cyrus SASL. Using them as
they are in the book gives me:
gcc -shared -fPIC -DPIC .libs/sasldb.o .libs/sasldb_init.o
.libs/plugin_common.o
I'm having a problem building Akonadi. When running cmake, I get an
error. The build/CMakeFiles/CMakeError.log gives:
File
/tmp/akonadi/akonadi-1.11.0/build/CMakeFiles/CMakeTmp/CheckSymbolExists.cxx:
/* */
#include QtCore/qglobal.h
int main(int argc, char** argv)
{
(void)argv;
#ifndef
On 02/26/2014 11:41 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
I'm having a problem building Akonadi. When running cmake, I get an
error. The build/CMakeFiles/CMakeError.log gives:
File
/tmp/akonadi/akonadi-1.11.0/build/CMakeFiles/CMakeTmp/CheckSymbolExists.cxx:
/* */
#include QtCore/qglobal.h
int
Armin K. wrote:
On 02/26/2014 11:41 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
I'm having a problem building Akonadi. When running cmake, I get an
error. The build/CMakeFiles/CMakeError.log gives:
File
/tmp/akonadi/akonadi-1.11.0/build/CMakeFiles/CMakeTmp/CheckSymbolExists.cxx:
/* */
#include
On 02/27/2014 12:02 AM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Armin K. wrote:
On 02/26/2014 11:41 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
I'm having a problem building Akonadi. When running cmake, I get an
error. The build/CMakeFiles/CMakeError.log gives:
File
On 02/27/2014 12:25 AM, Armin K. wrote:
On 02/27/2014 12:02 AM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Armin K. wrote:
On 02/26/2014 11:41 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
I'm having a problem building Akonadi. When running cmake, I get an
error. The build/CMakeFiles/CMakeError.log gives:
File
On 02/27/2014 01:16 AM, k...@higgs.linuxfromscratch.org wrote:
Author: ken
Date: Wed Feb 26 16:16:09 2014
New Revision: 12791
Log:
Remove another 5 libexecdirs.
Modified:
trunk/BOOK/general/sysutils/colord.xml
trunk/BOOK/gnome/applications/gnome-terminal.xml
On Thu, Feb 27, 2014 at 01:34:36AM +0100, Armin K. wrote:
On 02/27/2014 01:16 AM, k...@higgs.linuxfromscratch.org wrote:
Author: ken
Date: Wed Feb 26 16:16:09 2014
New Revision: 12791
Log:
Remove another 5 libexecdirs.
Modified:
trunk/BOOK/general/sysutils/colord.xml
k...@higgs.linuxfromscratch.org wrote:
Author: ken
Date: Wed Feb 26 17:45:11 2014
New Revision: 12792
Log:
acl is weird enough to need --libexecdir - thanks to Armin for pointing this
out to me.
Yes, I ran into that last night. I started to remove it, but it put
things in the wrong
Armin K. wrote:
No, the check is right. It is supposed to fail if the function isn't found.
OK. But it seems that it should be:
#ifndef xyx
#error xyx
#endif
Instead of what they have.
-- Bruce
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ:
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 09:11:32PM -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
k...@higgs.linuxfromscratch.org wrote:
Author: ken
Date: Wed Feb 26 17:45:11 2014
New Revision: 12792
Log:
acl is weird enough to need --libexecdir - thanks to Armin for pointing
this out to me.
Yes, I ran into that
On 02/27/2014 04:19 AM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Armin K. wrote:
No, the check is right. It is supposed to fail if the function isn't found.
OK. But it seems that it should be:
#ifndef xyx
#error xyx
#endif
Instead of what they have.
-- Bruce
No. If Windows windowing backend
On 02/27/2014 04:47 AM, Armin K. wrote:
On 02/27/2014 04:19 AM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Armin K. wrote:
No, the check is right. It is supposed to fail if the function isn't found.
OK. But it seems that it should be:
#ifndef xyx
#error xyx
#endif
Instead of what they have.
-- Bruce
I'm hoping to soon complete a build of IcedTea-2.4.5. (The reason
I say hoping is that I tried (accidentally) building a previous
version while running a 3.13.5 kernel, and had some pain, the first
part of which is summarised on lkml). With more consequential pain
to follow :-( I'm now back on
I have a problem with the book's instructions building strigi. clucene
is listed as an optional dependency and I have that installed. The book
has
cmake -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=/usr \
-DCMAKE_INSTALL_LIBDIR=lib \
-DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release \
..
It gives a linking error
On 02/27/14 00:37, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
I have a problem with the book's instructions building strigi. clucene
is listed as an optional dependency and I have that installed. The book
has
cmake -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=/usr \
-DCMAKE_INSTALL_LIBDIR=lib \
On 27/02/2014 06:23, Ken Moffat wrote:
So, is there any_simple_ test that an editing monkey can run, to
satisfy people that it is known to build and work properly using an
LFS-7.5 platform ? In this case, I happen to be running the
testsuite, but the book's comment doesn't fill me with
40 matches
Mail list logo
