1)
x7fonts.xml has an
as_root rm -rf $packagedir
in the loop over packages, although x7apps doesn't have the as_root,
and nor does x7libs.
2)
Installation of intel-vaapi-driver
appears to unpack the intel-vaapi-driver sources into the libva directory.
Does it need to be installed from
On Mon, 1 Mar 2021 at 16:51, Pierre Labastie via blfs-dev
wrote:
>
>
> You could try to run "svn status" and "svn diff" to see what is going
> on.
>
> If you have not done (on purpose) modifications to the working copy,
> you can also run "svn revert -R .", which will erase all (unwanted and
>
This one is probably me getting the SVN stuff wrong.
In my local BLFS trunk directory, I have just done (again, after
the rendering failed) an
$ svn update
Updating '.':
At revision 24315.
$
$ svn info
Path: .
Working Copy Root Path: /srv/distros/LFS/SVN/0-svn.lfs.org/BLFS/trunk/BOOK
URL:
On Mon, 1 Feb 2021 at 07:42, Ken Moffat via blfs-dev
wrote:
>
> Apparently I made the decision around a day or so ago to use the
> ISO date format instead of CCYY/MM/DD. Getting enough sleep would
> be nice ;-)
>
> More relevantly, I've added dates and severity ratings in the
> headers for each
On Fri, 29 Jan 2021 at 11:37, Ken Moffat via blfs-dev
wrote:
>
> I'm thinking the format will be something like the following (not
> necessarily what I originally suggested).
>
> (title: BLFS Security Advisories from September 2020 onwards)
>
> (heading: BLFS-10.0 was released on 2020/09/01
> -
On Thu, 7 Jan 2021 at 06:30, Ken Moffat via blfs-dev
wrote:
>
> My preference would be to have separate advisories for
> *each* update. If we look at Arch, they have a series of detailed
> advisories including summary, resolution, possible workaround, and
> impact. Gentoo is somewhat similar
On Sun, 3 Jan 2021 at 12:03, Ken Moffat via blfs-dev
wrote:
>
> However, asking questions about a 3-month-old version of svn is not
> something that many of us will remember ;-) I just hope you are
> keeping up to date with the 10.0 errata for security fixes (not for
> pango, but in general).
>
So an update on all this
First I thought I might try and layout, what I was trying to do
what I thought, having linked up the dependencies in the BLFS
Book, might not require me to build Cairo.
I have a self-contained tarball of Firefox, but I when I came to
run it, i am told that I need a fixup
On Sun, 3 Jan 2021 at 03:04, Pierre Labastie via blfs-dev
wrote:
>
> Looking in more depth, normally, according to meson.build, the
> dependency on cairo is not required, even for 1.46. So it should be
> able to compile if cairo is not available. Also, I've grep'ed for
> "run.*time" in the source
On Sun, 3 Jan 2021 at 02:00, Pierre Labastie via blfs-dev
wrote:
>
> >
> > How do I tell Pango that I don't want to build it with cairo ?
> >
> > I tried, well you would, wouldn't you:
> >
> > -Dcairo=false
> >
> > but no joy there.
> >
> > The NEWS file in the source tarball suggests that, once
Been working against the BLFS Version 2020-09-03, so Pango 1.46.0
but BLFS Version 2021-01-01 with Pango 1.48.0 has the same text.
I read,
Pango Dependencies
Required
Fontconfig-2.13.1 (must be built with FreeType-2.10.4 using
HarfBuzz-2.7.4), FriBidi-1.0.9, and GLib-2.66.4
Recommended
Appreciate that the various desktop environment dependency
chains are a rat's nest but I just noticed that,
in BLFS 10.0, FriBidi-1.0.9 is listed as a Required dependency
for GTK+-3.24.22, as is Pango-1.46.0, however, FriBidi-1.0.9 is
already listed as a Required dependency for Pango-1.46.0.
My Pkguser build alerted me to the fact that dvd+rw-tools
was trying to overwrite the one that cdrtools had installed.
I guess most BLFS builders would get whichever one they
install later.
FWIW, the latter is written in C, the former in C++, and
Schilly's sources contain a manpage.
pkg
Another one I noticed when perfroming a PkgUser install
Right at the end of the SCons installtion, it reports
Installing easy_install script to /usr/bin
Installing easy_install-3.8 script to /usr/bin
however, the install of python-3.8 had already installed a
/usr/bin/easy_install-3.8
Noticed this when doing a PkgUser install because of a conflict
between Vim and CMake
The install of Vim has deployed, amongst other things
pkg cmake:cmake-3.18.1> ls -l /usr/share/vim/vim82/
total 384
drwxr-xr-x 4 vim vim 4096 Nov 24 18:57 autoload
-rw-r--r--
On Tue, 3 Nov 2020 at 07:12, Ken Moffat via blfs-dev
wrote:
> ...
>
> Note that it did NOT overwrite pip, but it did overwrite 2to3 (the
> versions of that are currntnly similari except for the version of
> python, but if we're going to do this I suggest that we save the
> installed 2to3 from LFS
On Sat, 24 Oct 2020 at 00:22, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-dev
wrote:
>
> That's a good question, but I would also like to see if there is a
> survey of the major distros on the subject. I know arch has had
> python->python3 for a long time, but I don't know what Debian, Gentoo,
> Fedora, SUSe,
On Thu, 22 Oct 2020 at 00:26, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-dev
wrote:
>
> Currently we have /usr/bin/python -> python2. Is it time to change that
> to python3?
Probably a bit too drastic a view, but should we even be propagating
the need to have a bare python?
I appreciate it can be a convenience when
On Sun, 26 Jul 2020 at 09:45, Ken Moffat via blfs-dev
wrote:
>
> With t-bird 78 the option --disable-dbus is still accepted, but it
> doesn't do anything useful and breaks the build.
Surely that is one to bounce off the T-bird developers.
Seems hard to believe that you now need DBus to build an
On Wed, 29 Apr 2020 at 13:21, Pierre Labastie via blfs-dev
wrote:
>
> What you propose in V2 is what is used in the lfs book. It looks
> slightly better when rendered, but is much less readable when editing.
Yes, it was inspired by the LFS Book.
> Now, from my POV, command explanations in blfs
On Wed, 29 Apr 2020 at 11:55, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-dev
wrote:
>
> Right now I'm leaning against setting up /etc/bash.bashrc by default,
> but it doesn't take away a choice. If the file is missing, then having
> bash look for it and not finding it does nothing.
Yes, but if the file is there but
At present, the Book has this argument to configure
--with-passprompt="[sudo] password for %p: "
but doesn't explain the "%p", merely saying
--with-passprompt: This switch sets the password prompt.
which might leave the user wondering what the %p stands for.
The attached patch
On Tue, 28 Apr 2020 at 12:21, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-dev
wrote:
>
> Thanks for the input, but I like the way we have it now better. As far
> as sourcing /etc/bashrc goes, we do that in ~/.bashrc. If a user does
> not want to use it then its their distro.
>
> On the other hand, I've been thinking
A suggestion as regards the commentary within the examples for
/etc/profile and /etc/bashrc.
Text would be changed to have the filenames standing alone, rather
than being run into the text, as well as to note that
/etc/bashrc,
which, although mentioned using a "System wide" comment, as with
Apologies if this has been raised, considered, and discarded before.
As things stand, the order in which the XCB-related packages are installed
is as follows:
* xcb-proto-1.13
* libxcb-1.13.1
* Xorg Libraries
* xcb-util-0.4.0
* xcb-util-image-0.4.0
* xcb-util-keysyms-0.4.0
*
Something I noticed recently, was that a small percentage of
linkend attributes in xref tags have the target within single
quotes, whereas the vast majority use double quotes, vis:
22992$ grep -r "linkend='" * | wc -l
68
22992$ grep -r "linkend=\"" * | wc -l
7855
Of the 68 occurences that the
On Fri, 10 Apr 2020 at 04:15, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-dev
wrote:
>
> > We rarely change these files, but I agree that the naming is confusing.
> > I run into the problem at release time, but have never gotten to fixing
> > it. I'll see if I can do that today.
> >
> > Thanks for bringing it up.
>
>
On Fri, 10 Apr 2020 at 01:03, Pierre Labastie via blfs-dev
wrote:
>
> > but, in suggesting that, I'm unsure as to what that entails
> > for the Book gneration process as a whole, not least the
> >
> >
> >
> > tags,
> >
> > So, even though I can't present a fully formed "change
> > request", I
I'd like to make a suggestion, as regards the names of the
BLFS XML files for the SGML/XML/DocBook sections.
I've just come to add some of the DocBook packages to my
LFS/BLFS system, and hence my own copy of the Book sources,
and got a bit confused as to what related to what.
As things stand
Because I decided to build the three packges from LFS's Chapter 5
that don't get built in Chapter 6, despite the builder having had to
download the sources for Chapter 5, I noticed:
5.11. Tcl-8.6.10
The Tcl package contains the Tool Command Language.
5.12. Expect-5.45.4
The Expect package
I was just reading the
Introduction to Xorg-7
Setting up the Xorg Build Environment
section in BLFS 9.0 and, because I was thinking of putting all of
Xorg stuff in its own hierarchy, noticed the passage that says:
The common installation prefix for Xorg on Linux is /usr.
There is no
In the BLFS 8.0 book, we read, in the DHCP section:
8<8<8<8<8<8<8<
...
Additional Downloads
* Required patch:
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/patches/blfs/8.0/dhcp-4.3.5-client_script-1.patch
* Optional patch:
Hi there,
I normally add in the Berkeley DB package as part of my LFS build,
just so I can enable the extra server in Inetutils.
I note though that the BLFS version is 5.3.28, whilst the last of that
series, ie before Oracle changed the version-numbering system, is
6.2.32.
I just wanted to
33 matches
Mail list logo
