Archaic wrote:
Before you send patches, they need to work on ash as well, which IIRC,
is the closest representation of the original bourne shell.
But do we need a closest implementation of the original bourne shell or
something that strives to be POSIX-compliant as much as possible? In the
El Jueves, 15 de Septiembre de 2005 23:43, Jim Gifford escribió:
If we do this, we could remove chroot from the Cross-LFS, since it's
only there for same arch to same arch capability.
Exactly ;-)
--
Manuel Canales Esparcia
Usuario de LFS nº2886: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org
LFS en
On Don, 2005-09-15 at 14:43 -0700, Jim Gifford wrote:
M.Canales.es wrote:
Yes, that is how I see it also. Both books could be almost indentical except
in how the tolchains are created and the way used to build the final system
(boot or chroot).
If we do this, we could remove chroot
Which is ... odd, because IIRC, ash and sh don't *have* a source
builtin. [1] All they have is ., but if that doesn't work in zsh,
we'll be forced to remove support for one or the other shell.
AFAIK, the problem there is only related to zsh's /bin/sh compatibility
mode...Zsh when called by
According to this:- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Md5 and a number of articles
I've seen on Slashdot, MD5 is apparently no longer entirely secure...there's a
story on /. at the moment actually about Microsoft dropping MD5 for use in
Vista.
Should we possibly start considering something else? I
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
According to this:- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Md5 and a number of articles
I've seen on Slashdot, MD5 is apparently no longer entirely secure...there's a
story on /. at the moment actually about Microsoft dropping MD5 for use in
Vista.
Should we possibly start
Matthew Burgess wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
According to this:- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Md5 and a number of
articles
I've seen on Slashdot, MD5 is apparently no longer entirely
secure...there's a
story on /. at the moment actually about Microsoft dropping MD5 for
use in
Vista.
Hi. In chapter06/iproute2.html, the ./configure command line has an extra
unneeded space on the end. It has been there for a while.
robert
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Robert Connolly wrote:
Hi. In chapter06/iproute2.html, the ./configure command line has an extra
unneeded space on the end. It has been there for a while.
Thanks, fixed now.
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the
In what context? For hashing our own tarballs? Or do you mean not
Yes...hashing our own tarballs. I hadn't thought of it, but it makes sense
that we'd need to keep it for backward compatibility.
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ:
Another alternative to using md5sums to check the integity of a system
is to use sha1sums in addition to md5sums. It is not computationally
feasable to produce two files that have the same md5sum *and* sha1sum.
That sounds like a good idea.
--
Both shasum and the library it needs, mhash, are available from here if anyone
is interested.
http://www.netsw.org/crypto/hash/
The below address is the sourceforge download page for mhash as well.
http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=4286
--
sha1sum is included in coreutils and is standard on LFS.
It is? Excuse me for a minute while I go and wipe the egg off my face. ;-)
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
13 matches
Mail list logo
