From the md5sum file with today's rc1 stuff...
110c873942f2c0d2d678e25a7594decb lfs-bootscripts-20130805.tar.bz2
My result...
md5sum lfs-bootscripts-20130805.tar.bz2
70af42e8209cc933f22e44ea7b79b7c1 lfs-bootscripts-20130805.tar.bz2
Arthur
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo
Arthur Radley wrote:
From the md5sum file with today's rc1 stuff...
110c873942f2c0d2d678e25a7594decb lfs-bootscripts-20130805.tar.bz2
My result...
md5sum lfs-bootscripts-20130805.tar.bz2
70af42e8209cc933f22e44ea7b79b7c1 lfs-bootscripts-20130805.tar.bz2
Try downloading again. They only
need help
i have some error in the boot.
and how to fix the Mounting root file system in read-only mode .to
read-write .
message from boot.log
Apr 29 06:44:41 +07:00 (none) Mounting virtual file systems: /run /proc
/sys OK
Apr 29 06:44:41 +07:00 (none) Bringing up the loopback
purnomo hadi wrote:
need help
i have some error in the boot.
and how to fix the Mounting root file system in read-only mode .to
read-write .
message from boot.log
Apr 29 06:44:41 +07:00 (none) Mounting virtual file systems: /run /proc
/sys OK
Apr 29 06:44:41 +07:00 (none)
This other information
# fstab
# Begin /etc/fstab
# file system mount-point type options dump fsck
#order
/dev/mstr /xxx defaults,acl,user_xattr 0 2
/dev/sda8 swap
purnomo hadi wrote:
This other information
# fstab
# Begin /etc/fstab
# file system mount-point type options dump fsck
#order
/dev/mstr /xxx defaults,acl,user_xattr 0 2
purnomo hadi wrote:
## lspci
00:00.0 Host bridge: Intel Corporation 82865G/PE/P DRAM Controller/Host-Hub
Interface (rev 02)
00:02.0 VGA compatible controller: Intel Corporation 82865G Integrated
Graphics Controller (rev 02)
00:06.0 System peripheral: Intel Corporation
$ make DESTDIR=/tmp/boot
install: cannot stat ‘lfs/sysconfig/rc’: No such file or directory
make: *** [files] Error 1
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
partitions.
ps. I am still running on an ancient version of the lfs-bootscripts,
just copied over mountfs/checkfs for the lvm parts. (Only started
playing with lvm a few weeks ago).
--
Nathan Coulson (conathan)
--
Location: British Columbia, Canada
Timezone: PST (-8)
Webpage: http
Qrux wrote:
IMO, LVM and mdraid should be done super-early (whether embedded in
some other script or separated into their own). It should go right
after modules are loaded (S05modules in rcS.d, so maybe S06LVM and
S06md) for the people doing fancy initramfs boots with modules.
Started
On Mar 15, 2012, at 12:09 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Qrux wrote:
IMO, LVM and mdraid should be done super-early (whether embedded in
some other script or separated into their own). It should go right
after modules are loaded (S05modules in rcS.d, so maybe S06LVM and
S06md) for the people
fine with it after
S10udev, and I'd still advocate starting LVM before S20swap.
I'm still firmly of the opinion that if LVM userspace isn't present in LFS then
it should be omitted from the lfs bootscripts, and instead, either use seds in
the LVM install (to patch what--S10udev?) or more cleanly
On 02/03/2012 01:55 AM, Dean Takemori wrote:
I'm trying to setup multiple instances of rsyslog (one for kernel
messages) using lfs-bootscripts-20120116 and running into some
problems.
I'm using rsyslogd 5.8.6, which is designed with multiple instance
support. I've set up one configuration
Dean Takemori wrote:
I'm trying to setup multiple instances of rsyslog (one for kernel
messages) using lfs-bootscripts-20120116 and running into some
problems.
I'm using rsyslogd 5.8.6, which is designed with multiple instance
support. I've set up one configuration file (/etc/rsysklog.conf
gets passed on to pidofproc():
(lfs-bootscripts-20120116/lfs/lib/services/init-functions line 513-517)
if [ -z ${pidfile} ]; then
pidlist=`pidofproc -p ${pidfile} $@`
else
pidlist=`pidofproc $@`
fi
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http
! After the argument processing loop in statusproc(), the logic in the
test for the pidfile name is backward; the pidfile argument to statusproc
never gets passed on to pidofproc():
(lfs-bootscripts-20120116/lfs/lib/services/init-functions line 513-517)
if [ -z ${pidfile
I'm trying to setup multiple instances of rsyslog (one for kernel
messages) using lfs-bootscripts-20120116 and running into some
problems.
I'm using rsyslogd 5.8.6, which is designed with multiple instance
support. I've set up one configuration file (/etc/rsysklog.conf)
for the kernel logger
diff -Naurz lfs-bootscripts-20111007.orig/Makefile
lfs-bootscripts-20111007/Makefile
--- lfs-bootscripts-20111007.orig/Makefile
+++ lfs-bootscripts-20111007/Makefile
@@ -21,7 +21,7 @@
install -d -m ${DIRMODE} ${EXTDIR}/rc.d/rcS.d
install -d -m ${DIRMODE} ${EXTDIR}/rc.d/init.d
install
xinglp wrote:
diff -Naurz lfs-bootscripts-20111007.orig/Makefile
lfs-bootscripts-20111007/Makefile
--- lfs-bootscripts-20111007.orig/Makefile
+++ lfs-bootscripts-20111007/Makefile
@@ -21,7 +21,7 @@
install -d -m ${DIRMODE} ${EXTDIR}/rc.d/rcS.d
install -d -m ${DIRMODE} ${EXTDIR
xinglp wrote:
lfs/init.d/console
- [ -z ${FONT} ] [ is_true ${UNICODE} ]
+ [ -z ${FONT} ] is_true ${UNICODE}
- [ ${use_fb} == 1 || [ -z ${FONT} ] || setfont $FONT || failed=1
+ [ ${use_fb} == 1 ] || [ -z ${FONT} ] || setfont $FONT ||
ln -sf ../init.d/mountvirtfs /etc/rc.d/rcS.d/S00mountvirtfs
ln: failed to create symbolic link `/etc/rc.d/rcS.d/S00mountvirtfs':
No such file or directory
{rcS rc0 rc1 rc2 rc3 rc4 rc5 rc6} depend on create-dirs
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ:
xinglp wrote:
ln -sf ../init.d/mountvirtfs /etc/rc.d/rcS.d/S00mountvirtfs
ln: failed to create symbolic link `/etc/rc.d/rcS.d/S00mountvirtfs':
No such file or directory
{rcS rc0 rc1 rc2 rc3 rc4 rc5 rc6} depend on create-dirs
Thanks for the report. I'll check it out. It should work:
install
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
I'm attaching an updated Makefile. It adds a few more dependencies and
adds the target uninstall. Let me know if it works for you.
Oops, There is in error in the file I just sent.
Make this change to the file:
sed -i -e 's/file:/files:/' Makefile
-- Bruce
--
在 2011年9月22日 上午1:34，Bruce Dubbs bruce.du...@gmail.com 写道：
xinglp wrote:
ln -sf ../init.d/mountvirtfs /etc/rc.d/rcS.d/S00mountvirtfs
ln: failed to create symbolic link `/etc/rc.d/rcS.d/S00mountvirtfs':
No such file or directory
{rcS rc0 rc1 rc2 rc3 rc4 rc5 rc6} depend on create-dirs
Thanks
lfs/init.d/console
- [ -z ${FONT} ] [ is_true ${UNICODE} ]
+ [ -z ${FONT} ] is_true ${UNICODE}
- [ ${use_fb} == 1 || [ -z ${FONT} ] || setfont $FONT || failed=1
+ [ ${use_fb} == 1 ] || [ -z ${FONT} ] || setfont $FONT || failed=1
lfs
On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 21:35:47 -0700, Bryan Kadzban br...@kadzban.is-a-geek.net
wrote:
The kernel has *no* idea what your local time zone is, so it can't work
with an RTC in local-time (I'm pretty sure the kernel help message for
the last option says something to this effect). It always
On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 15:52:44 -0600, Matthew Burgess
matt...@linuxfromscratch.org wrote:
stty: standard input: Inappropriate ioctl for device
OK, figured this out to be the section of /etc/rc.d/init.d/functions that sets
the
COLUMNS variable by calling 'stty' (obvious now!). So, why can't it
Matthew Burgess wrote:
On Fri, 18 Sep 2009 15:52:44 -0600, Matthew Burgess
matt...@linuxfromscratch.org wrote:
stty: standard input: Inappropriate ioctl for device
OK, figured this out to be the section of /etc/rc.d/init.d/functions
that sets the COLUMNS variable by calling 'stty'
Message: 3
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2009 21:13:33 -0700
From: Bryan Kadzban br...@kadzban.is-a-geek.net
Subject: Re: Problems with setclock in
lfs-bootscripts-20090812 LFS
6.5
To: LFS Developers Mailinglist lfs-dev@linuxfromscratch.org
Message-ID: 4ab1b76d.4080...@kadzban.is-a-geek.net
On Tue, 15 Sep 2009 20:42:57 -0700, Bryan Kadzban br...@kadzban.is-a-geek.net
wrote:
Did you have that setting on? We might want to warn about that in the
book in the kernel-config section, actually. Hmm.
Nope, CONFIG_SYSFS_DEPRECATED_V2 is not set.
Here's the RTC-related config bits:
Matthew Burgess wrote:
On Tue, 15 Sep 2009 20:42:57 -0700, Bryan Kadzban
br...@kadzban.is-a-geek.net wrote:
Did you have that setting on? We might want to warn about that in the
book in the kernel-config section, actually. Hmm.
Nope, CONFIG_SYSFS_DEPRECATED_V2 is not set.
Here's the
Message: 7
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2009 20:51:16 -0700
From: Bryan Kadzban br...@kadzban.is-a-geek.net
Subject: Re: Problems with setclock in
lfs-bootscripts-20090812 LFS
6.5
To: LFS Developers Mailinglist lfs-dev@linuxfromscratch.org
Message-ID: 4aaf0f34.3020...@kadzban.is-a-geek.net
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Bryan Kadzban wrote:
What does /sbin/udevadm info -q path -n /dev/rtc say? Where does
the /sys/$(/sbin/udevadm info -q path -n /dev/rtc)/subsystem
symlink point to?
udevadm returns '/devices/platform/rtc_cmos/rtc/rtc0'
OK; here I get:
/devices/pnp0/00:02/rtc/rtc0
ga ho wrote:
It might be that your kernel's SUBSYSTEM is wrong for this
device. Do you have CONFIG_SYSFS_DEPRECATED turned on in the kernel
.config file? Udev docs claim it may not work with that setting (though I
don't know if that will cause this type of failure or not).
On Mon, 14 Sep 2009 20:51:16 -0700, Bryan Kadzban br...@kadzban.is-a-geek.net
wrote:
It might be that your kernel's SUBSYSTEM is wrong for this device. Do
you have CONFIG_SYSFS_DEPRECATED turned on in the kernel .config file?
Udev docs claim it may not work with that setting (though I don't
Matthew Burgess wrote:
On Mon, 14 Sep 2009 20:51:16 -0700, Bryan Kadzban
br...@kadzban.is-a-geek.net wrote:
It might be that your kernel's SUBSYSTEM is wrong for this device.
Do you have CONFIG_SYSFS_DEPRECATED turned on in the kernel .config
file? Udev docs claim it may not work with that
Bryan Kadzban wrote:
Do you have CONFIG_SYSFS_DEPRECATED turned on in the kernel .config
file?
Did you have that setting on? We might want to warn about that in the
book in the kernel-config section, actually. Hmm.
What does /sbin/udevadm info -q path -n /dev/rtc say? Where does
the
Message: 8
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2009 17:40:29 -0500
From: Bruce Dubbs bruce.du...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Problems with setclock in?
lfs-bootscripts-20090812 LFS
??? 6.5
To: LFS Developers Mailinglist lfs-dev@linuxfromscratch.org
Message-ID: 4aaad1dd.9050...@gmail.com
Content-Type
ga ho wrote:
55-lfs.rules:SUBSYSTEM==rtc, MODE=0644, ACTION==add,
RUN+=/etc/rc.d/init.d/setclock start
???-- Bruce
Thanks, I'll double check /dev/rtc and the 55-lfs.rules on my
system.
The rule in my 55-lfs.rules file is exactly as stated above however
running the command ls -l
Message: 8
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2009 17:40:29 -0500
From: Bruce Dubbs bruce.du...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Problems with setclock in
lfs-bootscripts-20090812 LFS
6.5
To: LFS Developers Mailinglist lfs-dev@linuxfromscratch.org
Message-ID: 4aaad1dd.9050...@gmail.com
Content-Type: text/plain
Hi,
I think there is a missing symbolic link for setclock in the Makefile of
lfs-bootscripts-20090812 as having built LFS 6.5 I noticed the time was always
out by an hour for example showing 22:00 BST when in fact it was 9pm in the UK.
In the lfs-bootscripts-20090812 Makefile
ga ho wrote:
Hi,
I think there is a missing symbolic link for setclock in the Makefile of
lfs-bootscripts-20090812 as having built LFS 6.5 I noticed the time was
always out by an hour for example showing 22:00 BST when in fact it was 9pm
in the UK.
In the lfs-bootscripts-20090812
On Fri, 31 Jul 2009 2:29:02 -0600, Matthew Burgess
matt...@linuxfromscratch.org wrote:
On Fri, 31 Jul 2009 07:44:48 +0100, Jeremy Henty onepo...@starurchin.org
wrote:
Same problem as for the initial release of -rc1: the lfs-bootscripts
and udev-config packages are not in the download
There's also the issue about MD5sums for those tarballs to figure out too.
Bruce, how do we sort this issue out? From what I can gather, the tarballs
are
regenerated each time the book is rendered. As the date on which the tarball
is
generated will affect the md5sum (I think), the
Same problem as for the initial release of -rc1: the lfs-bootscripts
and udev-config packages are not in the download directory. This
probably means that their download links in chapter 5 will break.
Regards,
Jeremy Henty
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ
On Fri, 31 Jul 2009 07:44:48 +0100, Jeremy Henty onepo...@starurchin.org
wrote:
Same problem as for the initial release of -rc1: the lfs-bootscripts
and udev-config packages are not in the download directory. This
probably means that their download links in chapter 5 will break.
I
Jeremy Henty wrote:
Something funny is happening: I get slightly different files from the
rc1 directory and the development directory:
$ ls -lA
total 120
-rw-rw-r-- 1 jeremy jeremy 42803 2009-07-25 08:02
lfs-bootscripts-20090523.dev.tar.bz2
-rw-rw-r-- 1 jeremy jeremy
Randy McMurchy wrote:
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 07/25/09 15:42 CST:
If we do a -rc2, I'll update the md5sums in that version.
What do you mean if? We've updated multiple packages including a
toolchain package since rc1 was released. Certainly we'll release at
least one more
On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 03:42:09PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
The script that generates the -dev book daily generates the tarballs
and updates the md5sums in the book. ... The differences in
md5sums can be attributed to the dates of the directories within the
tar files.
Ah, nothing
Bruce Dubbs a écrit :
jp wrote:
hi, all
I rendered the xml of the development book. Surprisingly, the md5sum of
lfs-bootscripts differs from what is on the website.
Can someone explain what is happening ?
You don't say what version you are rendering.
In any case
jp wrote:
Bruce Dubbs a écrit :
jp wrote:
hi, all
I rendered the xml of the development book. Surprisingly, the md5sum of
lfs-bootscripts differs from what is on the website.
Can someone explain what is happening ?
You don't say what version you are rendering
DJ Lucas a écrit :
jp wrote:
Bruce Dubbs a écrit :
jp wrote:
hi, all
I rendered the xml of the development book. Surprisingly, the md5sum of
lfs-bootscripts differs from what is on the website.
Can someone explain what is happening
DJ Lucas wrote:
jp wrote:
After rendering, the md5sums of udev-config and lfs-bootscripts
tarballs match those in the generated book, but both differ from
what I can read here:
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/development/chapter03/packages.html
As those files are supposed
hi, all
I rendered the xml of the development book. Surprisingly, the md5sum of
lfs-bootscripts differs from what is on the website.
Can someone explain what is happening ?
Thanks in advance, and best regards
jp
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http
jp wrote:
hi, all
I rendered the xml of the development book. Surprisingly, the md5sum of
lfs-bootscripts differs from what is on the website.
Can someone explain what is happening ?
You don't say what version you are rendering.
In any case, there are a couple of scripts, make-aux
Okay, perhaps I'm just being dense since I don't use the old bootscripts
anymore, but wouldn't this simple change solve our ills with the samba
script and others? I mean, they seem to run correctly with the new
pidofproc, which should be more transparent as to how they work, but
this seems
of the LFS-bootscripts, I was asking
myself why this is the case...?
Any insight appreciated, no hurry nescessary (I had to re-include it
already..).
greets,
jens
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
23.56...drifting
By caffeine alone I
sets it up at boot-time.
As this script is (no longer?) part of the LFS-bootscripts, I was asking
myself why this is the case...?
The stuff in contrib/ isn't officially supported, but it should be
usable. Neither the network service framework nor the mtu service have
changed since I've been
...
Where is the download location for the new LFS-bootscripts you rolled?
greets,
jens
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
23.56...drifting
By caffeine alone I set my mind in motion, By the beans of Java
do thoughts acquire speed, hands acquire
Jens Stroebel wrote:
I maybe should know where to look, but I don't...
Where is the download location for the new LFS-bootscripts you rolled?
http://downloads.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs-bootscripts-20070730.tar.bz2
-- DJ Lucas
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ
:24:54PM +, DJ Lucas wrote:
Jens Stroebel wrote:
I maybe should know where to look, but I don't...
Where is the download location for the new LFS-bootscripts you rolled?
http://downloads.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs-bootscripts-20070730.tar.bz2
-- DJ Lucas
Thanks
On 7/31/07, Jens Stroebel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
as far as I can tell, everything boots flawlessly; there is one thing
I did leave out because of local deviation from the book: we took
care to have our loglevel set here before that got into the
lfs-bootscripts package, so I didn't check
I rolled a new snapshot that has a few changes since the last 20070420
tarball. Please test it out so we can get any fixes in to 6.3. They
should be entirely backwards compatible with existing scripts.
--
Dan
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ:
This is the same problem Alexander mentioned the other day, I believe.
Alex :-)
Oh sorry, I thought my problem is so wheired I didn't look for threads
on the list.
regards Thorsten
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
this helps, regards thorsten
--- lfs-bootscripts-6.2/lfs/init.d/functions.orig 2006-03-22
02:02:32.0 +0100
+++ lfs-bootscripts-6.2/lfs/init.d/functions2006-10-31 14:58:51.0
+0100
@@ -363,7 +363,7 @@
for pid in ${lpids}
do
On Tuesday 31 October 2006 17:59, thorsten wrote:
And tried to stop them with
killproc -p /var/run/openvpn-1.pid openvpn and
killproc -p /var/run/openvpn-2.pid openvpn respectively.
When both instances are up and I tried to stop one of both, the right
openvpn process gets killed and the
Alex Merry wrote:
On Tuesday 31 October 2006 17:59, thorsten wrote:
And tried to stop them with
killproc -p /var/run/openvpn-1.pid openvpn and
killproc -p /var/run/openvpn-2.pid openvpn respectively.
When both instances are up and I tried to stop one of both, the right
openvpn process gets
Hi,
I am trying to get the 6.2 tarball built and pushed out, but I can't
find these 2 packages, their links are broken in the 6.2 book.
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/6.2/chapter03/packages.html
says:
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/downloads/6.2/lfs-bootscripts-6.2.tar.bz2
On 8/4/06, Justin R. Knierim [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Both are 404. Tried looking in downloads.linuxfromscratch.org, etc.
They likely are the same as 6.2-preX but I want the official one for
md5sum and safety sake, and to remind you guys they are missing.
I think the ones that were in 6.2.x
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Benjamin John wrote:
Hello,
please repack the lfs-bootscripts-6.2 package because the path in the
package is still
lfs-bootscripts-6.2*-pre2*
An oversight. Will do.
Please also fix MD5 sum in the book, and regenerate the XML tarball. I
will not be able to release
Benjamin John wrote:
Hello,
please repack the lfs-bootscripts-6.2 package because the path in the
package is still
lfs-bootscripts-6.2*-pre2*
An oversight. Will do.
-- Bruce
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe
Hi,
first, let me report success on a manual build of LFS 6.2-pre1.
Congratulations on producing yet another great book!
Things I encountered that have not been mentioned yet:
7.2.2. Contents of LFS-Bootscripts: cleanfs:
I think
On 7/23/06, Stefan Krah [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
first, let me report success on a manual build of LFS 6.2-pre1.
Congratulations on producing yet another great book!
Things I encountered that have not been mentioned yet:
7.2.2. Contents of LFS-Bootscripts: cleanfs
Gerard Beekmans wrote:
If you want to take over, that'll be fine. It just makes sense having
one person keep track of the necessary changes to be made.
Sounds good.
Thanks.
-- DJ Lucas
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
DJ Lucas wrote:
Sounds good.
There are a few tickets in Trac marked as bootscript if you wanted to
take a look at them for starters?
--
Gerard Beekmans
/* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ:
DJ Lucas wrote:
already. But I'll volunteer for the bootscripts role if the group still
thinks that they should remain separate from main development.
I never made that a firm requirement but at the time it made sense to do
so. It'd allow a distinction between book editor and bootscripts
Nathan Coulson wrote:
I am finding that I have no time to work on the lfs bootscripts these
last few months, but at the moment I think I am the leader who decides
what gets added or not.
These days, I am barely even reading my email.
Sorry to see you go, but if you don't have the time, you
Archaic wrote:
On Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 11:02:49PM -0100, Duncan Webb wrote:
Running a NTP daemon requires a permanent internet connection. Dual boot
usually requires the clock in local time, that's clear.
Absolutely and totally false. Please do your research before making such
On Thu, 3 Nov 2005 01:28:11 -0700
Archaic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 05:58:51AM -0100, Duncan Webb wrote:
Now that we're no longer in summer time in the Makefile for
LFS-Bootscripts-3.2.1 there are no rules to install setclock during a
reboot or shutdown. So
On Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 09:47:54AM -0100, Duncan Webb wrote:
Maybe I was not too clear.
No, you were perfectly clear.
If the system clock is set to local time then when you shut-down the
hardware clock should be set to system time.
And again, no. LFS cannot assume the sanity of the system
Bryan Kadzban wrote:
On Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 08:28:12AM -0700, Archaic wrote:
On Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 09:47:54AM -0100, Duncan Webb wrote:
Maybe I was not too clear.
No, you were perfectly clear.
If the system clock is set to local time then when you shut-down the
On Thu, 3 Nov 2005, Duncan Webb wrote:
What I don't understand is why anybody would have a problem syncing the
hardware clock to the system clock at reboot/power off. After all the system
clock is synced to the hardware clock at boot.
In that case, please search the lfs archives and
On Thu, Nov 03, 2005 at 11:02:49PM -0100, Duncan Webb wrote:
Running a NTP daemon requires a permanent internet connection. Dual boot
usually requires the clock in local time, that's clear.
Absolutely and totally false. Please do your research before making such
statements.
What I don't
On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 12:29:23AM -0100, Duncan Webb wrote:
Sort of guessed this by Archaic reaction. Never would have questioned it
had the start case not synced to the hardware clock.
That's a fair question. However, where would the system clock be
initially set if not from the hwclock?
Hi,
Now that we're no longer in summer time in the Makefile for
LFS-Bootscripts-3.2.1 there are no rules to install setclock during a
reboot or shutdown. So the hardware clock is not being synchronised with
the system clock.
Regards,
Duncan
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo
Here is a patch to the current bootscripts to start/stop single interfaces
only. It is not FSB compliant afaik. I guess it will no tbe included it the
book for that reason, but since i often need it i though i might share it
with you anyway.
michael
lfs-bootscripts-3.2.1-configure_single_if-1
that you meant 'LSB' compliant. I don't see anywhere that
it's not. AFAICT, it doesn't say that we can't extend the
arguments...only requires that 'start' is a valid argument, and then
only in some scripts. And I like the idea. I haven't tested it yet,
but I like it. Besides that, lfs
Archaic wrote:
That just seems silly. Warn was much nicer and still allowed things to
proceed.
Can we not still warn, but just leave the exit status as '0'. The spec
(from the quote given) doesn't appear to forbid output, it just mandates
what the exit status should be.
--
Matthew Burgess wrote:
Archaic wrote:
That just seems silly. Warn was much nicer and still allowed things to
proceed.
Can we not still warn, but just leave the exit status as '0'. The spec
(from the quote given) doesn't appear to forbid output, it just mandates
what the exit status
Matthew Burgess wrote:
Archaic wrote:
That just seems silly. Warn was much nicer and still allowed things to
proceed.
Can we not still warn, but just leave the exit status as '0'. The spec
(from the quote given) doesn't appear to forbid output, it just mandates
what the exit status
I believe you are correct, but I'd have to direct this back to Nathan.
If you want to add it for yourself, it's real easy three
lines in killproc:
Could you give some line numbers for that patch? :) Sorry, I'm just not
QUITE sure where to put them. :)
Dave
--
Non-Technical explanation: I actually tested fully (I believe) and it
works!!! :-D
Well that looks better. ;) I'm still wondering, though, why: When I have a
process not running (spamd in this case), and I do a spamd stop, it still
says, [ OK ]. :D Shouldn't it say /usr/bin/spamd is not
David Fix wrote:
Non-Technical explanation: I actually tested fully (I believe) and it
works!!! :-D
Well that looks better. ;) I'm still wondering, though, why: When I have a
process not running (spamd in this case), and I do a spamd stop, it still
says, [ OK ]. :D Shouldn't it say
Not now. 3.2.x went after partial LSB-2.1.0 compliancy to ease the
transition. See below from the spec.
Ah, gotcha. :) Makes sense then. :) Thanks so much for your hard work,
DJ. :)
Dave
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ:
On Wed, Aug 10, 2005 at 09:53:13AM -0500, DJ Lucas wrote:
*
running start on a service already running
*
running stop on a service already stopped or not running
That just seems silly. Warn was much nicer and still allowed things to
proceed.
--
Archaic
Want control,
On 8/8/05, DJ Lucas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
DJ Lucas wrote:
Okay..I'm not sure how (if) this affects the LSB function for pidofproc,
And I did break it in a rather obvious way. Attached should be a
working patch against lfs-bootscripts-3.2.2. I've tested it to the best
of the amount
And I did break it in a rather obvious way. Attached should be a
working patch against lfs-bootscripts-3.2.2. I've tested it
to the best
of the amount of time availible, but it should be correct. Alexander,
Archaic, Randy and anyone else who has seen the issue, I'd
appreciate if
you
Well, I didn't have the problem before... However, I am now
experiencing
the following problem after applying your patch:
/etc# init.d/spamd stop
Stopping spamd... [ FAIL ]
It was running, and it DID stop it, but reported a failure.
Then I tried starting it again:
/etc#
Ok, without the patch, DJ, I am experiencing a problem, where I try to stop
an already stopped process, and it pretends to work. :) However, it really
doesn't, of course, since the process isn't actually running. And you
already have seen what the patch did to me. :)
Dave
PS Sorry
David Fix wrote:
Well, I didn't have the problem before... However, I am now
experiencing
the following problem after applying your patch:
/etc# init.d/spamd stop
Stopping spamd... [ FAIL ]
It was running, and it DID stop it, but reported a failure.
Then I tried starting it again:
/etc#
1 - 100 of 130 matches
Mail list logo
