William Harrington wrote:
Hello all,
Maybe someone else has this problem or can provide some kinda of direction:
Problem:
Strange characters using en_US using the GCC4-20050906 book.
example:
lmsensors output with en_US or en_US.utf8: CPU: +25°C (low =
+0°C, high = +75
Hello all,
Maybe someone else has this problem or can provide some kinda of direction:
Problem:
Strange characters using en_US using the GCC4-20050906 book.
example:
lmsensors output with en_US or en_US.utf8: CPU: +25°C (low =
+0°C, high = +75°C)
lmsesnsors output with
On Sat, Sep 17, 2005 at 05:35:54PM -0400, Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
>
> Again, as I see things, if we want to be using gcc4 we should be doing
> it correctly and using the code that is meant for it, ie, glibc
True enough, but snapshots suck. Before doing that, I would vote for
taking gcc-4 out of
Anyone ever read this?
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/info-gnu/2005-04/msg2.html
I especially noted the statement:
"If you especially want to compile glibc using GCC development
snapshots, then you should be working with the current development
version of glibc (see http://www.gnu.org/
Archaic wrote:
On Sat, Sep 17, 2005 at 07:17:56PM +0100, Jasmine Iwanek wrote:
ive got mono installed and without --disable-csharp gettext will fail in
chapter 5 of the LFS book - grokking the sources of gettext-0.14.5 i
find no references to --without-csharp yet --disable-csharp works fine
f
On Sat, Sep 17, 2005 at 07:17:56PM +0100, Jasmine Iwanek wrote:
>
> ive got mono installed and without --disable-csharp gettext will fail in
> chapter 5 of the LFS book - grokking the sources of gettext-0.14.5 i
> find no references to --without-csharp yet --disable-csharp works fine
> for me..
Tushar Teredesai wrote:
BTW, has the LFS patch been submitted upstream? If yes, what was the
response? If no (or even if it was rejected before), maybe we can
submit it in response to the thread Matt mentioned.
The patch header just says "pending" - does that mean it's pending a
response from
On 9/17/05, Matthew Burgess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> The patch header just says "pending" - does that mean it's pending a
> response from upstream, or it's pending submission upstream? Anyway,
> looking at the comments in the patch, leads me to suggest it'll be
> rejected straight away due
On 9/17/05, Archaic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 17, 2005 at 02:27:04PM +0100, Matthew Burgess wrote:
> >
> > Upstream have addressed the problems with `uname -a', `uname -i' and
> > `uname -p' outputting 'unknown' for the processor type and hardware
> > platform under Linux. I'd there
Matthew Burgess wrote:
> ==
> [coreutils-5.2.1 + current LFS patch]:
>
> bash-3.00# uname -i
> i386
> bash-3.00# uname -p
> athlon-4
> bash-3.00# uname -a
> Linux kyoto 2.6.10-5-386 #1 Thu Sep 8 06:18:41 UTC 2005 i686 athlon-4
> i386 GNU/Linux
> ==
1. Get pkgsrc, ftp or cvs
1.1 CVS
# cd /usr
# cvs -d [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/cvsroot co -P pkgsrc
1.2 FTP
# ftp ftp://ftp.netbsd.org/pub/pkgsrc/current/pkgsrc.tar.gz
2. Install and configure the pkgsrc management tools.
# cd /usr/pkgsrc/bootstrap
# sh bootstrap
# cp work/mk.conf.example /etc/mk.conf
3
On Sat, Sep 17, 2005 at 02:27:04PM +0100, Matthew Burgess wrote:
>
> Upstream have addressed the problems with `uname -a', `uname -i' and
> `uname -p' outputting 'unknown' for the processor type and hardware
> platform under Linux. I'd therefore like to take their patch and use it
> in LFS, so
Hi folks,
Upstream have addressed the problems with `uname -a', `uname -i' and
`uname -p' outputting 'unknown' for the processor type and hardware
platform under Linux. I'd therefore like to take their patch and use it
in LFS, so we're consistent with upstream. Note the following behaviours:
13 matches
Mail list logo
