Re: [blfs-dev] Systemd patch in sysutils

On 3/25/21 12:15 PM, John Burrell via blfs-dev wrote: The patch in the commands needs updating to fixes-2.patch instead of fixes-1 jb. Hi John, Thank you for reporting this! I've fixed it at r24401, and it should be present in the next render. - Doug -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/

[blfs-dev] Systemd patch in sysutils

The patch in the commands needs updating to fixes-2.patch instead of fixes-1 jb. -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Re: [blfs-dev] systemd latest version 247.1

> > > > > Hi Wayne, > > > > Did you build with -Dmode=release? systemd-oomd is classified as > > experimental, so we use -Dmode=release to prevent it from being built > > and installed. We've got -Dmode=release in LFS. In BLFS, we're also > > going to need to add -Dpamconfdir=/etc/pam.d to force th

Re: [blfs-dev] systemd latest version 247.1

On Fri, 2020-12-04 at 12:08 -0600, Douglas R. Reno via blfs-dev wrote: > > On 12/4/20 11:16 AM, Wayne Blaszczyk via blfs-dev wrote: > > On Sat, 2020-12-05 at 04:04 +1100, Wayne Blaszczyk wrote: > > > On Fri, 2020-12-04 at 09:17 -0600, Douglas R. Reno via blfs-dev wrote: > > > > On 12/4/20 3:03 AM,

Re: [blfs-dev] systemd latest version 247.1

On 12/4/20 11:16 AM, Wayne Blaszczyk via blfs-dev wrote: [snip] Found that a user systemd-oom is require. However there are still issues: Dec 05 04:13:20 lfs02 systemd-oomd[197]: Pressure Stall Information (PSI) is not supported Looks like a kernel option: Symbol: PSI [=n] Type : bool Def

Re: [blfs-dev] systemd latest version 247.1

On 12/4/20 11:16 AM, Wayne Blaszczyk via blfs-dev wrote: On Sat, 2020-12-05 at 04:04 +1100, Wayne Blaszczyk wrote: On Fri, 2020-12-04 at 09:17 -0600, Douglas R. Reno via blfs-dev wrote: On 12/4/20 3:03 AM, Wayne Blaszczyk via blfs-dev wrote: Hi Guys, Spent the last hour racking my brain on w

Re: [blfs-dev] systemd latest version 247.1

On Fri, 2020-12-04 at 09:17 -0600, Douglas R. Reno via blfs-dev wrote: > > On 12/4/20 3:03 AM, Wayne Blaszczyk via blfs-dev wrote: > > Hi Guys, > > > > Spent the last hour racking my brain on why Gentoo, Arch, and Fedora had > > version 247.1 > > Turns out that they are pulling from > > https:/

Re: [blfs-dev] systemd latest version 247.1

On Sat, 2020-12-05 at 04:04 +1100, Wayne Blaszczyk wrote: > On Fri, 2020-12-04 at 09:17 -0600, Douglas R. Reno via blfs-dev wrote: > > > > On 12/4/20 3:03 AM, Wayne Blaszczyk via blfs-dev wrote: > > > Hi Guys, > > > > > > Spent the last hour racking my brain on why Gentoo, Arch, and Fedora had >

Re: [blfs-dev] systemd latest version 247.1

On 12/4/20 3:03 AM, Wayne Blaszczyk via blfs-dev wrote: Hi Guys, Spent the last hour racking my brain on why Gentoo, Arch, and Fedora had version 247.1 Turns out that they are pulling from https://github.com/systemd/systemd-stable I didn't know this repository existed. Regards, Wayne. Hi W

[blfs-dev] systemd latest version 247.1

Hi Guys, Spent the last hour racking my brain on why Gentoo, Arch, and Fedora had version 247.1 Turns out that they are pulling from https://github.com/systemd/systemd-stable I didn't know this repository existed. Regards, Wayne. -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: ht

Re: [blfs-dev] Systemd config info for bridgeutils

Le 22/03/2020 à 21:41, Douglas R. Reno via blfs-dev a écrit : > > On 3/22/20 6:10 AM, Pierre Labastie via blfs-dev wrote: >> Hi, >> Message for systemd devs: There is a "TBA" for bridge-utils configuration in >> the systemd book. Should I create a ticket? Or just remove that section? >> >> Pierre

Re: [blfs-dev] Systemd config info for bridgeutils

On 3/22/20 6:10 AM, Pierre Labastie via blfs-dev wrote: Hi, Message for systemd devs: There is a "TBA" for bridge-utils configuration in the systemd book. Should I create a ticket? Or just remove that section? Pierre I'd say remove that section for now. I'm not certain on how to configure brid

[blfs-dev] Systemd config info for bridgeutils

Hi, Message for systemd devs: There is a "TBA" for bridge-utils configuration in the systemd book. Should I create a ticket? Or just remove that section? Pierre -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above inf

Re: [blfs-dev] Systemd sed problem

On 8/9/19 5:08 AM, John Burrell via blfs-dev wrote: This doesn't work as written: sed -i '1506 s//' \ '1507 s//' \ '1508 s//' src/shared/seccomp-util.c it should be: sed -e '1506 s//' \ -e '1507 s//' \ -e '1508 s//' \ -i src/shared/seccomp-util.c jb.

[blfs-dev] Systemd sed problem

This doesn't work as written: sed -i '1506 s//' \ '1507 s//' \ '1508 s//' src/shared/seccomp-util.c it should be: sed -e '1506 s//' \ -e '1507 s//' \ -e '1508 s//' \ -i src/shared/seccomp-util.c jb. -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: h

Re: [blfs-dev] [systemd] Add a warning about /run/nologin in shadow

On 5/13/19 10:09 AM, Xi Ruoyao via blfs-dev wrote: On 2019-05-12 12:03 -0500, Douglas R. Reno via blfs-dev wrote: On 5/12/19 1:48 AM, Xi Ruoyao via blfs-dev wrote: On 2019-05-12 13:10 +0800, Xi Ruoyao via blfs-dev wrote: On 2019-05-11 16:07 +，DJ Lucas via blfs-dev: Note that the root user

Re: [blfs-dev] [systemd] Add a warning about /run/nologin in shadow

On 2019-05-12 12:03 -0500, Douglas R. Reno via blfs-dev wrote: > On 5/12/19 1:48 AM, Xi Ruoyao via blfs-dev wrote: > > On 2019-05-12 13:10 +0800, Xi Ruoyao via blfs-dev wrote: > > > On 2019-05-11 16:07 +，DJ Lucas via blfs-dev: > > > > Note that the root user can always login, regardless of /run

Re: [blfs-dev] [systemd] Add a warning about /run/nologin in shadow

On 5/12/19 1:48 AM, Xi Ruoyao via blfs-dev wrote: On 2019-05-12 13:10 +0800, Xi Ruoyao via blfs-dev wrote: On 2019-05-11 16:07 +，DJ Lucas via blfs-dev: Note that the root user can always login, regardless of /run/nologin. I think I've tried to use root but it didn't work... Let me retry.

Re: [blfs-dev] [systemd] Add a warning about /run/nologin in shadow

On 5/12/19 1:48 AM, Xi Ruoyao via blfs-dev wrote: On 2019-05-12 13:10 +0800, Xi Ruoyao via blfs-dev wrote: On 2019-05-11 16:07 +，DJ Lucas via blfs-dev: Note that the root user can always login, regardless of /run/nologin. I think I've tried to use root but it didn't work... Let me retry.

Re: [blfs-dev] [systemd] Add a warning about /run/nologin in shadow

On 2019-05-12 13:10 +0800, Xi Ruoyao via blfs-dev wrote: > On 2019-05-11 16:07 +，DJ Lucas via blfs-dev: > > Note that the root user can always login, regardless of /run/nologin. > > I think I've tried to use root but it didn't work... Let me retry. You're right. When I tried to login as roo

Re: [blfs-dev] [systemd] Add a warning about /run/nologin in shadow

On 2019-05-11 16:07 +，DJ Lucas via blfs-dev: > I had worked around this in LFS a long time ago. I created > /lib/systemd/systemd-user-sessions with nothing more than 'rm -f > /run/nologin' as it will be replaced when systemd is reinstalled in > BLFS. Is this no longer working? If not, the no

Re: [blfs-dev] [systemd] Add a warning about /run/nologin in shadow (Was: [blfs-book] r21579 - trunk/BOOK/postlfs/security)

On 5/11/2019 1:48 AM, xry111--- via blfs-book wrote: Modified: trunk/BOOK/postlfs/security/shadow.xml == --- trunk/BOOK/postlfs/security/shadow.xml Fri May 10 13:25:39 2019 (r21578) +++ trunk/BOOK/postlfs/se

[blfs-dev] systemd and OpenSSL security updates

Greetings As some of you may have just seen (if you follow -book), I picked up the outstanding updates in LFS, and the ones that have to be cloned in BLFS. This morning, OpenSSL put out a security patch release. TCL/TK also had a security patch release in the past couple of days, and DJ gener

Re: [blfs-dev] systemd-239 testsuite assumes "/bin/touch"

On 11/17/2018 05:16 PM, Douglas R. Reno via blfs-dev wrote: On Sat, Nov 17, 2018, 4:56 PM Xi Ruoyao via blfs-dev wrote: systemd-239 test suite fails in BLFS: > exec-basic.service: Executing: /bin/touch /tmp/b > exec-basic.service: F

Re: [blfs-dev] systemd-239 testsuite assumes "/bin/touch"

On 2018-11-17 18:39 -0600, DJ Lucas via blfs-dev wrote: > On November 17, 2018 4:56:06 PM CST, Xi Ruoyao via blfs-dev < > blfs-dev@lists.linuxfromscratch.org> wrote: > > (along with `head`, `sleep`, and `nice`) > https://refspecs.linuxfoundation.org/LSB_5.0.0/LSB-Core-generic/LSB-Core-generic/comm

Re: [blfs-dev] systemd-239 testsuite assumes "/bin/touch"

On 2018-11-17 18:39 -0600, DJ Lucas via blfs-dev wrote: > On November 17, 2018 4:56:06 PM CST, Xi Ruoyao via blfs-dev < > blfs-dev@lists.linuxfromscratch.org> wrote: > > systemd-239 test suite fails in BLFS: > > > > > exec-basic.service: Executing: /bin/touch /tmp/b > > > exec-basic.service: Faile

Re: [blfs-dev] systemd-239 testsuite assumes "/bin/touch"

On November 17, 2018 4:56:06 PM CST, Xi Ruoyao via blfs-dev wrote: >systemd-239 test suite fails in BLFS: > >> exec-basic.service: Executing: /bin/touch /tmp/b >> exec-basic.service: Failed to execute command: No such file or >directory > >We can list `touch` as "a Coreutils programs expected by

Re: [blfs-dev] systemd-239 testsuite assumes "/bin/touch"

On Sat, Nov 17, 2018, 4:56 PM Xi Ruoyao via blfs-dev < blfs-dev@lists.linuxfromscratch.org wrote: > systemd-239 test suite fails in BLFS: > > > exec-basic.service: Executing: /bin/touch /tmp/b > > exec-basic.service: Failed to execute command: No such file or > directory > > We can list `touch` as

[blfs-dev] systemd-239 testsuite assumes "/bin/touch"

systemd-239 test suite fails in BLFS: > exec-basic.service: Executing: /bin/touch /tmp/b > exec-basic.service: Failed to execute command: No such file or directory We can list `touch` as "a Coreutils programs expected by BLFS packages to be in /bin", and move it to /bin in Sect. 6.54 (along with

Re: [blfs-dev] systemd patch

On 11/7/2018 11:29 AM, renodr via blfs-dev wrote: I also know this patch isn't in BLFS yet. I'm looking into what I can do for that, although it's going to be probably 36-40 hours before I can commit anything, assuming my system wants to cooperate with me. I'm putting at least the BLFS port

Re: [blfs-dev] systemd patch

On 2018-11-05 16:35, DJ Lucas via blfs-dev wrote: On November 5, 2018 1:28:22 PM CST, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-dev wrote: Why on earth do we have a patch for systemd that is 13786 lines long? The comment says "Fixes security and usability issues discovered since release." To me NOT making a new re

Re: [blfs-dev] systemd patch

On November 5, 2018 1:28:22 PM CST, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-dev wrote: >Why on earth do we have a patch for systemd that is 13786 lines long? >The comment says "Fixes security and usability issues discovered since >release." To me NOT making a new release is the mark either lazy or >incompetent

Re: [blfs-dev] systemd patch

On 11/05/2018 02:28 PM, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-dev wrote: Why on earth do we have a patch for systemd that is 13786 lines long? The comment says "Fixes security and usability issues discovered since release." To me NOT making a new release is the mark either lazy or incompetent program management.

[blfs-dev] systemd patch

Why on earth do we have a patch for systemd that is 13786 lines long? The comment says "Fixes security and usability issues discovered since release." To me NOT making a new release is the mark either lazy or incompetent program management. -- Bruce -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/lis

Re: [blfs-dev] [systemd] Locale settings in /etc/profile.d/i18n.sh and /etc/locale.conf

On 2018-09-26 16:52 -0500, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-dev wrote: > On 09/26/2018 09:19 AM, Xi Ruoyao via blfs-dev wrote: > > In LFS systemd book section 7.7 we create /etc/locale.conf as > > locale > > configuation file. But, in BLFS systemd book Chapter 3 section > > "The > > Bash Startup Files" we cre

Re: [blfs-dev] [systemd] Locale settings in /etc/profile.d/i18n.sh and /etc/locale.conf

On 09/26/2018 09:19 AM, Xi Ruoyao via blfs-dev wrote: In LFS systemd book section 7.7 we create /etc/locale.conf as locale configuation file. But, in BLFS systemd book Chapter 3 section "The Bash Startup Files" we create /etc/profile.d/i18n.sh which sets up the locale for bash. Their settings m

[blfs-dev] [systemd] Locale settings in /etc/profile.d/i18n.sh and /etc/locale.conf

In LFS systemd book section 7.7 we create /etc/locale.conf as locale configuation file. But, in BLFS systemd book Chapter 3 section "The Bash Startup Files" we create /etc/profile.d/i18n.sh which sets up the locale for bash. Their settings may be inconsistent and confuse the users (I was confused

[blfs-dev] SystemD 8.2 stable errarta

Hello, When I installed apache I found that I was unable to use systemctl start httpd. Every time it timed out. I investigated and found that httpd started fine from the command line. I found at https://github.com/Werkov/systemd/commit/73969ab61c39357e6892747e43307fbf07cafbed a patch that reso

Re: [blfs-dev] systemd-238

On 05/15/2018 01:43 PM, Thanos Baloukas wrote: On 15/05/2018 09:08 μμ, Cyrillo Baggins wrote: I don't see the five sed command in the current BLFS book, I guess that's explain the error http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/systemd/general/systemd.html On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 10:45 P

Re: [blfs-dev] systemd-238

On 05/15/2018 01:08 PM, Cyrillo Baggins wrote: I don't see the five sed command in the current BLFS book, I guess that's explain the error http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/systemd/general/systemd.html I was referring to: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/systemd/chapter06/sys

Re: [blfs-dev] systemd-238

On 15/05/2018 09:08 μμ, Cyrillo Baggins wrote: I don't see the five sed command in the current BLFS book, I guess that's explain the error http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/systemd/general/systemd.html On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 10:45 PM, Bruce Dubbs > wro

Re: [blfs-dev] systemd-238

I don't see the five sed command in the current BLFS book, I guess that's explain the error http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/systemd/general/systemd.html On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 10:45 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote: > On 05/15/2018 07:36 AM, Cyrillo Baggins wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> today I d

Re: [blfs-dev] systemd-238

On 05/15/2018 07:36 AM, Cyrillo Baggins wrote: Hello, today I did a fresh build of the latest lfs systemd dev book and blfs systemd dev book. systemd-238 fails to build even with the upstream patch, the error I get references to the following bug: https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/

[blfs-dev] systemd-238

Hello, today I did a fresh build of the latest lfs systemd dev book and blfs systemd dev book. systemd-238 fails to build even with the upstream patch, the error I get references to the following bug: https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/8507 When building with systemd-master.zip as sourc

Re: [blfs-dev] Systemd-238 in BLFS-dev doesn't compile

On 04/05/2018 05:26 μμ, John Burrell wrote: Using the commands for systemd-238 in the sysutils section of the systemd version of the Book gives the following error: [316/1488] Compiling C object 'src/core/core@sta/dbus-mount.c.o'. FAILED: src/core/core@sta/dbus-mount.c.o ccache cc  -Isrc/core/c

[blfs-dev] Systemd-238 in BLFS-dev doesn't compile

Using the commands for systemd-238 in the sysutils section of the systemd version of the Book gives the following error: [316/1488] Compiling C object 'src/core/core@sta/dbus-mount.c.o'. FAILED: src/core/core@sta/dbus-mount.c.o ccache cc -Isrc/core/core@sta -Isrc/core -I../src/core -I. -I../ -Isr

Re: [blfs-dev] systemd-237-dependencies.patch

On 19/02/2018 11:56, Thanos Baloukas wrote: Also on LLVM-5.0.1 Command Explanations has -DLLVM_ENABLE_FFI=ON: This switch enables LLVM to use libffi. Remove if you did not install libffi. The 'Remove if you did not install libffi.' has to go or become 'Remove if this is not desired.' Fixed

[blfs-dev] systemd-237-dependencies.patch

Also on LLVM-5.0.1 Command Explanations has -DLLVM_ENABLE_FFI=ON: This switch enables LLVM to use libffi. Remove if you did not install libffi. The 'Remove if you did not install libffi.' has to go or become 'Remove if this is not desired.' -- Thanos Index: general/sysutils/systemd.xml ===

Re: [blfs-dev] Systemd-236 issues

Brendan L wrote: I noticed when configuring systemd-236, there is now these two warnings:  Message: WARNING:  The local user with the configured user name "nobody" of the nobody user does not have UID 65534 (it has 99).  Your build will result in an user table setup that is incompatible with

[blfs-dev] Systemd-236 issues

I noticed when configuring systemd-236, there is now these two warnings: Message: WARNING: The local user with the configured user name "nobody" of the nobody user does not have UID 65534 (it has 99). Your build will result in an user table setup that is incompatible with the local system. Mes

Re: [blfs-dev] Systemd-234 major issues

On 08.09.2017 13:47, m...@pc-networking-services.com wrote: > Hello, > > Although this version of systemd on the newly released 8.1 boots and runs > services as expected, it has a major flaw, in that it is basically > unusable for a desktop environment. > > The major issue is that for gparted for

[blfs-dev] Systemd-234 major issues

Hello, Although this version of systemd on the newly released 8.1 boots and runs services as expected, it has a major flaw, in that it is basically unusable for a desktop environment. The major issue is that for gparted for instance, it needs root privileges so you install the ssh-ask so that sud

Re: [blfs-dev] systemd and qemu experiences

On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 07:40:28PM +0100, Ken Moffat wrote: > I'm fairly sure that I've built and DESTDIR'd firefox in /tmp on an > 8GB machine - with 55.0beta3 the build and DESTDIR only total 5.8 GB. > The humidity must be getting to me. Obviously 5.8GB won't fit in a default tmpfs on an 8GB ma

Re: [blfs-dev] systemd and qemu experiences

On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 01:50:38PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote: > Ken Moffat wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 17, 2017 at 09:35:55PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote: > > > > > > A couple of notes here. The tmp.img is a separate partition as I > > > generally > > > use that for the actual builds. systemd by default

Re: [blfs-dev] systemd and qemu experiences

Ken Moffat wrote: On Sat, Jun 17, 2017 at 09:35:55PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote: A couple of notes here. The tmp.img is a separate partition as I generally use that for the actual builds. systemd by default uses a tmpfs for /tmp. I wonder about the wisdom of that, especially in a multi-user sys

Re: [blfs-dev] systemd and qemu experiences

On 18 June 2017 at 03:35, Bruce Dubbs wrote: > Warning: This is quite long. If replying, please trim the response to > just the relevant portion. > > Another issue is that package configuration needed to be done as the > packages are built to get a working system. I do not have any ideas about

Re: [blfs-dev] systemd and qemu experiences

On 18 June 2017 at 03:35, Bruce Dubbs wrote: > Warning: This is quite long. If replying, please trim the response to > just the relevant portion. > > Starting out, there are several packages needed to really get things > going. In my case openssh, wget, nfs (libtirpc/nfs-utils/rpcbind), and >

Re: [blfs-dev] systemd and qemu experiences

On Sat, Jun 17, 2017 at 09:35:55PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote: > > A couple of notes here. The tmp.img is a separate partition as I generally > use that for the actual builds. systemd by default uses a tmpfs for /tmp. > I wonder about the wisdom of that, especially in a multi-user system as I > in

Re: [blfs-dev] systemd and qemu experiences

Pierre Labastie wrote: As I was going through the list of packages, I was unsure of the versions I had vs what was in the book. In the script names, is would be helpful if the package version was also listed. for instance: 120-z-cmakevs 120-z-cmake-3.8.2 Versions of installed packag

Re: [blfs-dev] systemd and qemu experiences

Just replying about jhalfs: On 18/06/2017 04:35, Bruce Dubbs wrote: > > At that point I wanted to use jhalfs-blfs to show me the boot order. I wanted > to build gnome, so I selected gnome-terminal and a few other items and ran > jhalfs. It seemed to work well, however all the scripts were on the

[blfs-dev] systemd and qemu experiences

Warning: This is quite long. If replying, please trim the response to just the relevant portion. I have spent the last week building systemd on a qemu instance. I'm writing this to document some of the things I learned. I started up qemu using a debian 8.8 iso. The command I used was: #!

[blfs-dev] systemd+initrd=race condition

Hi, To break uniformity in my jhalfs tests, I decided I would build LFS-systemd. It happened it was on an LVM partition, so I needed an initrd, which I took from the book. After completing jhalfs, it booted OK, but then I installed Linux-PAM and could not login again. Each time I entered my userna

Re: [blfs-dev] systemd

On Oct 18, 2016 6:41 AM, "Roger Koehler" wrote: > > > On Oct 16, 2016 8:04 AM, "Pierre Labastie" wrote: > > > > > > On 16/10/2016 00:16, Bruce Dubbs wrote: > > > > Roger Koehler wrote: > > > > > > > >> Incidentally, when I tried using jhalfs with the blfs_root option, the > > > >> systemd version

Re: [blfs-dev] systemd

> On Oct 16, 2016 8:04 AM, "Pierre Labastie" wrote: > > > > On 16/10/2016 00:16, Bruce Dubbs wrote: > > > Roger Koehler wrote: > > > > > >> Incidentally, when I tried using jhalfs with the blfs_root option, the > > >> systemd version of LFS build worked great, but it used the System V > > >> versi

Re: [blfs-dev] systemd

On Oct 16, 2016 8:04 AM, "Pierre Labastie" wrote: > > On 16/10/2016 00:16, Bruce Dubbs wrote: > > Roger Koehler wrote: > > > >> Incidentally, when I tried using jhalfs with the blfs_root option, the > >> systemd version of LFS build worked great, but it used the System V > >> version of BLFS. > >

Re: [blfs-dev] systemd

On 16/10/2016 00:16, Bruce Dubbs wrote: > Roger Koehler wrote: > >> Incidentally, when I tried using jhalfs with the blfs_root option, the >> systemd version of LFS build worked great, but it used the System V >> version of BLFS. > > If you use a current version of jhalfs, the first option in Boo

Re: [blfs-dev] systemd

Roger Koehler wrote: Incidentally, when I tried using jhalfs with the blfs_root option, the systemd version of LFS build worked great, but it used the System V version of BLFS. If you use a current version of jhalfs, the first option in Book Settings selects the version to be built. -- Br

Re: [blfs-dev] systemd

On Oct 15, 2016 2:03 PM, "Bruce Dubbs" wrote: > > Roger Koehler wrote: > >> That is the link I am referring to. It has this command listed under >> Current Systemd Development: >> >> svn co svn://svn.linuxfromscratch.org/BLFS/branches/systemd/ > > > That needs to be fixed on the webpage. > > >> So

Re: [blfs-dev] systemd

Roger Koehler wrote: That is the link I am referring to. It has this command listed under Current Systemd Development: svn co svn://svn.linuxfromscratch.org/BLFS/branches/systemd/ That needs to be fixed on the webpage. So, I guess this link should be removed, and I should use the first one:

Re: [blfs-dev] systemd

> From: Roger Koehler > Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2016 12:24:31 -0600 > Subject: Re: [blfs-dev] systemd > > On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 12:21 PM, Julien Lepiller wrote: > > On Sat, 15 Oct 2016 12:11:19 -0600 > > Roger Koehler wrote: > > > >> So, I guess this li

Re: [blfs-dev] systemd

On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 12:21 PM, Julien Lepiller wrote: > On Sat, 15 Oct 2016 12:11:19 -0600 > Roger Koehler wrote: > >> So, I guess this link should be removed, and I should use the first >> one: >> >> svn co svn://svn.linuxfromscratch.org/BLFS/trunk/BOOK/ > > this is the correct one. > >> But

Re: [blfs-dev] systemd

On Sat, 15 Oct 2016 12:11:19 -0600 Roger Koehler wrote: > That is the link I am referring to. It has this command listed under > Current Systemd Development: > > svn co svn://svn.linuxfromscratch.org/BLFS/branches/systemd/ > > Then performing this command: svn update > > The version is 2016-07

Re: [blfs-dev] systemd

> From: Roger Koehler > Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2016 12:11:19 -0600 > Subject: Re: [blfs-dev] systemd > > On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 11:37 AM, akhiezer wrote: > >> From: Roger Koehler > >> Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2016 11:50:38 -0600 > >> Subject: [blfs-dev] s

Re: [blfs-dev] systemd

On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 11:37 AM, akhiezer wrote: >> From: Roger Koehler >> Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2016 11:50:38 -0600 >> Subject: [blfs-dev] systemd >> >> I would like to build the development version of blfs systemd, but >> when I build the

Re: [blfs-dev] systemd

> From: Roger Koehler > Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2016 11:50:38 -0600 > Subject: [blfs-dev] systemd > > I would like to build the development version of blfs systemd, but > when I build the svn branch of the book listed on the > www.linuxfromscratch.org website, the version is still

[blfs-dev] systemd

I would like to build the development version of blfs systemd, but when I build the svn branch of the book listed on the www.linuxfromscratch.org website, the version is still at 2016-07-10. How do get the latest version from svn? -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://

Re: [blfs-dev] [systemd / gnome merge] - Proposed Arrangment of GNOME packages

> systemdgnome-shell > systemdgnome-shell-extensions > systemdgnome-session > systemdGDM > systemdgnome-user-docs > Both yelp > Both notification-daemon > Both polkit-gnome > > CHAPTER 34: GNOME APPLICATIONS > Both network-manager-applet My experience

Re: [blfs-dev] [systemd / gnome merge] - Proposed Arrangment of GNOME packages

On 6/30/2016 5:37 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote: Douglas R. Reno wrote: Hello, I just spent some time creating what I believe is what the GNOME build order should be between books. I designed the order to require minimal changes to Chapter 34, GNOME Applications, by keeping the Telepathy and GNOME Desk

Re: [blfs-dev] [systemd / gnome merge] - Proposed Arrangment of GNOME packages

Douglas R. Reno wrote: Hello, I just spent some time creating what I believe is what the GNOME build order should be between books. I designed the order to require minimal changes to Chapter 34, GNOME Applications, by keeping the Telepathy and GNOME Desktop sections merged into Chapter 33, GNOME

[blfs-dev] [systemd / gnome merge] - Proposed Arrangment of GNOME packages

Hello, I just spent some time creating what I believe is what the GNOME build order should be between books. I designed the order to require minimal changes to Chapter 34, GNOME Applications, by keeping the Telepathy and GNOME Desktop sections merged into Chapter 33, GNOME Libraries and Utili

Re: [blfs-dev] [systemd merge/gnome merge] - Moving Nautlius

Douglas R. Reno wrote: Hello, I would like to request moving Nautlius to the previous chapter (GNOME Libraries and Utilities rather than GNOME Applications). In systemd, we had it in GNOME Desktop, as many applications build plugins for it and it is required for the GNOME Desktop itself. In orde

[blfs-dev] [systemd merge/gnome merge] - Moving Nautlius

Hello, I would like to request moving Nautlius to the previous chapter (GNOME Libraries and Utilities rather than GNOME Applications). In systemd, we had it in GNOME Desktop, as many applications build plugins for it and it is required for the GNOME Desktop itself. In order for us to maintain

Re: [blfs-dev] [systemd-merge / gnome] Shuffling the build order

Douglas R. Reno wrote: Hello, I would like to ask for opinions on this before I go ahead and try it. In order for us to merge GNOME, we have to move the build order that currently exists in trunk to support a full desktop. Currently, trunk's build order appears to be in a somewhat alphabetical o

Re: [blfs-dev] [systemd-merge / gnome] Shuffling the build order

On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 09:10:50PM -0500, Douglas R. Reno wrote: > Hello, > > I would like to ask for opinions on this before I go ahead and try it. In > order for us to merge GNOME, we have to move the build order that currently > exists in trunk to support a full desktop. Currently, trunk's buil

[blfs-dev] [systemd-merge / gnome] Shuffling the build order

Hello, I would like to ask for opinions on this before I go ahead and try it. In order for us to merge GNOME, we have to move the build order that currently exists in trunk to support a full desktop. Currently, trunk's build order appears to be in a somewhat alphabetical order. Would there be

[blfs-dev] Systemd merge status

I am now done with what will be "merged" outside of the DEs. I'm reasonably comfortable with the results (though, there will likely be a handful of minor issues, so keep an eye out). As to using trunk to render the systemd book, a couple of things need to happen yet. The only tested DE from th

Re: [blfs-dev] systemd-230 auto-kill background processes on logout?

On June 6, 2016 3:53:01 AM CDT, lf...@cruziero.com wrote: > >Hi, > > >For new-ver 230 sysd, should b/lfs ([1,2]) use explicit default of >'--without-kill-user-processes' &/or 'KillUserProcesses=no' per debian >bug item below (where there are counter-points too): > > >https://bugs.debian.org/c

[blfs-dev] systemd-230 auto-kill background processes on logout?

Hi, For new-ver 230 sysd, should b/lfs ([1,2]) use explicit default of '--without-kill-user-processes' &/or 'KillUserProcesses=no' per debian bug item below (where there are counter-points too): https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=825394 "systemd kill background processes aft

Re: [blfs-dev] systemd-gpt-auto-generator

On 12/22/2014 5:32 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote: Christopher Gregory wrote: On Tue, December 23, 2014 10:10 am, Christopher Gregory wrote: snip a whole bunch of stuff The other fix is to blow off systemd and use easy to update bash scripts with System V. Without ever trying systemd, I agree with

Re: [blfs-dev] systemd-gpt-auto-generator

Christopher Gregory wrote: On Tue, December 23, 2014 10:10 am, Christopher Gregory wrote: Hello, With systemd-217 they have introduced a nasty flaw/bug that ONLY effects people who are using GPT partitions, which I am using. Before anyone starts and says that it can be configured and over-rid

Re: [blfs-dev] systemd-gpt-auto-generator

On Tue, December 23, 2014 10:10 am, Christopher Gregory wrote: > Hello, > > > With systemd-217 they have introduced a nasty flaw/bug that ONLY effects > people who are using GPT partitions, which I am using. > > Before anyone starts and says that it can be configured and over-ridden > think twice o

[blfs-dev] systemd-gpt-auto-generator

Hello, With systemd-217 they have introduced a nasty flaw/bug that ONLY effects people who are using GPT partitions, which I am using. Before anyone starts and says that it can be configured and over-ridden think twice or even three times before you say that I am wrong, because this has been conf

[blfs-dev] Systemd-217 needs additional fix in order to be able to boot

Hello, I have just completed another new build of lfs systemd, namely: Version 20141209-systemd. I used jhalf as I always do now for lfs installs. When I rebooted the system it hung on: A start job is running for Trigger Flushing of Journal to Persistent Storage (14 min 7s / no limit) At th

Re: [blfs-dev] systemd: introduced consoled

On Mon, Oct 13, 2014 at 6:27 PM, William Harrington wrote: > > On Oct 13, 2014, at 11:31, Bruce Dubbs wrote: > >> The issue of VT not supporting unicode, etc is valid, but really, how many >> users actually use a VT any more. To me about the only thing it's useful >> for is typing startx. :)

Re: [blfs-dev] systemd: introduced consoled

On Oct 13, 2014, at 11:31, Bruce Dubbs wrote: > The issue of VT not supporting unicode, etc is valid, but really, how many > users actually use a VT any more. To me about the only thing it's useful for > is typing startx. :) -- or debugging LFS. I suppose put out on a mailing list how many

Re: [blfs-dev] systemd: introduced consoled

Armin K. wrote: consoled is a replacement aimed to bring a kernel VT component to userspace, aka CONFIG_VT as some people seemed to agree that it has become too old and rusty (not sure if rusty is the right word here) and it does not fulfill all setups nowadays (unicode characters, modern fonts,

Re: [blfs-dev] systemd: introduced consoled

On 10/13/2014 01:49 PM, Fernando de Oliveira wrote: > If it continues like that, it will be easy to contract LFS and BLFS to > one book, with essentially thre applications doing everything: systemd > and, perhaps, glibc and linux-kernel. > > Reproduced from [1]: > > {{{ > authorDavid Herr

[blfs-dev] systemd: introduced consoled

If it continues like that, it will be easy to contract LFS and BLFS to one book, with essentially thre applications doing everything: systemd and, perhaps, glibc and linux-kernel. Reproduced from [1]: {{{ author David Herrmann 2014-10-03 13:58:44 (GMT) committer David Herrmann 2014-10-

[blfs-dev] systemd book is now live

On 08/02/2014 03:08 AM, Armin K. wrote: > The systemd book is now available from > > http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/systemd/ > > And will be generated on daily basis. The main web site and ticket > system remain to be updated. If you notice any problems please let me know. > The book

[blfs-dev] systemd book is now live

The systemd book is now available from http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/systemd/ And will be generated on daily basis. The main web site and ticket system remain to be updated. If you notice any problems please let me know. I have removed blfs-systemd from my personal web space. -- No

  1   2   >