or, on second inspection, it might not have solved the problem... i'll look
more into this tomorrow to see if this was a false-success, or a
false-alarm-for-a-false-success...
sean
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Hi,
On Wednesday 22 August 2007 07:51:51 am you wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > to test i modified the Makefile to compile everything with LFS (patch
> > attached) and re-created my i386 base.cow and everything seems to work as
> > it should!
>
> Eek!
i was surprised too. sure was a lot easier than actually
Hi,
> to test i modified the Makefile to compile everything with LFS (patch
> attached) and re-created my i386 base.cow and everything seems to work as it
> should!
Eek!
> the only potential issue i see is that on an arch where sizeof(ino_t) will
> change with the addition of LFS, if an .ili
hi junichi,
after thinking about things a bit, i think i may have a simpler solution!
i think the primary problem is that the ilist file is basically a bunch of
struct ilist objects written in serially in binary form. the struct ilist is
something like
struct ilist {
dev_t foo
Hi,
> if i understand correctly, the problem had something to do with /home being
> special cased, and the ilist file being created for the first time outside
> the chroot whereas previously it was exclusively manipulated inside the
> chroot?
That is correct. To solve this, after much slee
hi junichi,
i really hope you would reconsider your position on this. as i mentioned on
irc earlier i've been very happily making use of this "undocumented feature"
i guess you could call it to cross build from amd64 to i386 for some time,
maybe a year or longer. you invited me to send a pat
6 matches
Mail list logo
