Hi,
I see this before, but already forgot how I overcome it.
I'm puzzled, to be honest.
Ensure that dynamic loader is visible as /tools/lib/ld-linux.so.2 from
chroot (this message is produced when dynamic loader cannot be found).
It is, as far as I can ensure, I even added /lib and
Hi, all!
I've passed through roadmap in the wiki. Some comments on the following line:
* make (no known compatible alternatives, any issues with 3.80?)
There is actually one problem with make-3.80. I've pointed it out
about a year ago during LFS-6.0 test phase. Read more here:
Hai Zaar wrote:
Hi, all!
I've passed through roadmap in the wiki. Some comments on the following line:
* make (no known compatible alternatives, any issues with 3.80?)
There is actually one problem with make-3.80. I've pointed it out
about a year ago during LFS-6.0 test phase. Read more
Being unable to build LFS6.1 on my FC4 system because of the gcc4
problem, I installed a minimal ubuntu distribution.
When I tried building binutils, I ran into the problem of the
nonexistence of yyparse. I had to hunt around on the web a bit, and
I finally found somebody who had the same
On 7/6/05, Kim McCall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
that there ought to be some kind of documentation of what development
tools are required in order to build LFS.
There already are: from the binutils page
Installation depends on: Bash, Bison, Coreutils, Diffutils, Flex, GCC,
Gettext,
Dear List,
I present a few nits I have picked out of the
hair of blfs-6.1-pre1 (the book):
I've decided to send this collection as it is rather than wait for
completion. I dare say I will find others later.
6.58.1
compliment should be complement
Preface.2 (gosh, a preface
On Wed, 6 Jul 2005, Bernard Leak wrote:
Dear List,
I present a few nits I have picked out of the
hair of blfs-6.1-pre1 (the book):
LFS, not blfs.
The word is programme. Yes, it really is, unless you
are writing American. It is a curiosity of the LFS book
that
And if push comes to shove, I assume Canadian usage will be the
preferred model ;)
Yay! :) BTW, Happy Canada Day to those Canadians on here. ;) (Sure I'm
about 5 days late saying it on here, but I had a HECK of a good time on the
first!)
Dave
--
The pseudo random patch for 2.6.12 that's up on the patches site doesn't
apply cleanly to 2.6.12.2.
Is there anyone uploading a fix soon ?
Alan.
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/hlfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
I'm building LFS 6.1 pre 1 using Ubuntu as the host system.
Everything has gone well up through the early parts of Chapter 6.
I've built glibc and then run
# make check
It aborted most of the way through, and the last output file it seemed
to have written was
Just wondering... I'm going through the SVN-20050705 book, and I notice
that it's still got binutils 2.16 in it... There's 2.16.1 out, and I've
successfully compiled it instead of 2.16 (I'm at chapter 6.14 now)... Any
reasons that we shouldn't be using 2.16.1? :)
Dave
--
David Fix wrote:
Just wondering... I'm going through the SVN-20050705 book, and I notice
that it's still got binutils 2.16
Well, it did up until 07:26 (UTC) today :) I upgraded it this morning,
it should show up in tomorrows render.
Regards,
Matt.
--
We may have to stop the presses. Zlib has a DoS vulnerability. I'm
looking for info now.
--
Archaic
A new one? Affecting v1.2.2? Where did you read about this? I can't find
anything about it! :) Not that I disbelieve you, I just want to read about
it myself! :)
Dave
--
A possible buffer overflow exploit was discovered in zlib. This includes
web browsers or email programs able to view PNG images (which are
compressed by zlib). The most likely scenario is a Denial of Service by
crashing the program that is linked to zlib. However, a possibility of
priviledge
A possible buffer overflow exploit was discovered in zlib.
--
Archaic
Thanks for the link and the patch, Archaic. :) Much appreciated. :)
Dave
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above
On Wed, Jul 06, 2005 at 01:36:49PM -0400, David Fix wrote:
A new one? Affecting v1.2.2? Where did you read about this? I can't find
anything about it! :) Not that I disbelieve you, I just want to read about
it myself! :)
Subscribe to bugtraq if you want to keep up on vulnerabilities
Hey guys...
I'm running through SVN-20050705, and I notice that on 6.14 (GCC 3.4.4), it
says to run the tests (make check)... However, in chapter 5, it mentions
that you don't HAVE to run the tests in chapter 5, but gives details on the
test suite notes... In chapter 6, where the tests are
David Fix wrote:
Hey guys...
I'm running through SVN-20050705, and I notice that on 6.14 (GCC 3.4.4), it
says to run the tests (make check)... However, in chapter 5, it mentions
that you don't HAVE to run the tests in chapter 5, but gives details on the
test suite notes... In chapter 6, where
Hey guys,
Here's another one for SVN-20050705, SVN-20050705 - 5.11. GCC-3.4.4 - Pass
2...
There's this line:
Results can be compared with those located at
http://beta.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/build-logs/svn/.
However, that gives me a 404. :) I also tried it on a few different
mirrors. :)
David Fix wrote:
You can find this same error in the testing book (TESTING-20050705), with
the following URL (for GCC-3.4.3, of course):
http://beta.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/build-logs/testing/
This is a website issue - will be fixed later today.
Thanks
--
JH
--
The Linux From Scratch community is pleased to announce the release of
LFS 6.1-pre2. This pre-release for the upcoming final 6.1 revision of
the book includes a patch to fix a recently disclosed security bug in zlib.
You can read the book online at
In Linux From Scratch, Version 6.1-pre2, Table of Contents, Preface,
Host System Requirements located at:
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/6.1-pre2/prologue/hostreqs.html
I found the following errors:
In the first paragraph the word First is used and is followed by
Secondly. Second is
DJ Lucas wrote:
mountkernfs script succeeds, however it leaves behind messages (merged)
when sh is a symlink to ash. '' does not redirect. Suggest '21'.
Also, I'm not sure what version of hotplug right this second, but the
math early on in the following files is also broken with ash symlinked
I hope this isn't too nit picky:
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/6.1-pre2/prologue/typography.html
1.
This form of text is used for several purposes in the book, mainly to
emphasize important points or items.
Should not be a comma splice and should instead be:
This form of text is
Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
DJ Lucas wrote:
mountkernfs script succeeds, however it leaves behind messages (merged)
when sh is a symlink to ash. '' does not redirect. Suggest '21'.
Also, I'm not sure what version of hotplug right this second, but the
math early on in the following files
DJ Lucas wrote:
Yes, I had thought about suggesting that, however held it for a few
reasons, the most important is that we don't install ash in LFS.
Not breaking BLFS is IMHO more important.
Also with hotplug-ng coming...
Forget about hotplug-ng. It's already dead, to be replaced with the
26 matches
Mail list logo
