[blfs-dev] gperf

2013-03-04 Thread Bruce Dubbs
In the instructions for gperf, we have If desired, create a text version of the documentation by issuing the following command: makeinfo -o doc/gperf.txt --plaintext doc/gperf.texi The problem is that doc/gperf.texi is broken by texinfo-5.0. We need sed -e '/1131/s/itemx/item/' doc/gperf.tex

Re: [blfs-dev] OpenSSH

2013-03-04 Thread Bruce Dubbs
Treah Blade wrote: > Hello guys thought I would share this little tidbit of information > that I happened across. I apologize if someone else has mentioned it > already. Anyway I was building Wget and used the option to include > openSSL and it reported that that library was not there. Well that wa

[blfs-dev] DistroWatch donation to LFS

2013-03-04 Thread Gerard Beekmans
Hi guys, If you haven't already read this posting yet (it was also referred to in a blfs-dev post today): http://distrowatch.com/weekly.php?issue=20130304#donation I spoke with Ladislav (the founder of that site) to get some more details on what prompted all this and, well, the write up

[blfs-dev] Distrowatch contrib

2013-03-04 Thread akhiezer
Just for-info, in case not already seen: [ ref: http://distrowatch.com/weekly.php?issue=20130304#donation ] "Donations: Linux From Scratch receives US$350.00" "February 2013 DistroWatch.com donation: Linux From Scratch We are happy to announce that the recipient of th

Re: [blfs-dev] The changelog hates us

2013-03-04 Thread Bruce Dubbs
Rob Landley wrote: > The wget-list in the most recent 7.3 release is also access denied > right now. Fixed. I have a restrictive umask and that keeps the permissions too restrictive when copying files. I just loosened it up. > By the way, having a readme in that directory point to: > http

Re: [blfs-dev] The changelog hates us

2013-03-04 Thread Rob Landley
On 03/03/2013 11:00:29 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote: > Rob Landley wrote: > > On 03/01/2013 11:17:31 AM, Bruce Dubbs wrote: > >> Armin K. wrote: > >>> http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/changelog-2012.txt > >>> > >>> Again 404 ... > >> > >> OK, It's back. I'll try to investigate why. It may have > s