Re: Some LFS 6.5 - 6.6 Inconsistencies
On Mon, 2010-06-07 at 17:45 -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote: That's not so easy. We create the book with Docbook xml. I don't know of a way to to do that. We do have both a change log and a What's new section. We are trying to do a new release every 6 months. If you look at What's new, almost every package changes each time, but most use the instructions unchanged. Yeah, I generally work off the Changelog page when updating the scripts I build everything with, working up the list from whatever date I last built against. Works for me - Changelog open in one tab, and the index in a second one. Simon. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Glibc Make Error - Pass 1, Chapter 5.7, LFS Book 6.6
Hello everybody,
I am new to this mailing list and this is also my first try to build a LFS. I
am using Linux for several years now and decided now to try to build my own
Linux.
Ok, now for my building environment. If there are any infos missing, just ask:
Base system: Debian kernel 2.6.26-2-686
Minmal system installed, no X
I am running the system as a vmware machine
Ok, now to my problem. I tried to follow the book word by word. I say try
because during my last try I mixed up some paths and the error occured so I
thought I start all over again. Now all the paths are (hopefully) correct, but
the same error occurs.
The compilation of the binutils, gcc, gmp and mpfr went just fine without any
errors ... or I didn´t see them but it looks all good to me.
Anyway, during the make of glibc I noticed that he failed to compile a
regular expression (see log for details). I don´t know if that is important.
Finally he breaks down when he tries to make target (Log: No rule to make
target `/mnt/lfs/sources/glibc-build/Versions.all', needed by
`/mnt/lfs/sources/glibc-build/abi-versions.h'. Stop.)
??? I absolutely don´t have any clue what to do and what to fix! I guess the
scripts are all good, so I don´t want to touch them. Anyone with an idea what
to do?
I would apreciate it very much if there would be someone who could help me or
give me a hint! Many thanks in advance.
If there are any infromations missing, please ask, ok?
Thanks and greetings
Pascal
#
--BEGIN CODE:--
make -r PARALLELMFLAGS= CVSOPTS= -C ../glibc-2.11.1 objdir=`pwd` all
make[1]: Entering directory `/mnt/lfs/sources/glibc-2.11.1'
(echo 'sysd-rules-sysdirs := sysdeps/i386/elf
nptl/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/i386/i686 sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/i386/i686
nptl/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/i386 sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/i386
nptl/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux nptl/sysdeps/pthread sysdeps/pthread
sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux sysdeps/gnu sysdeps/unix/common sysdeps/unix/mman
sysdeps/unix/inet sysdeps/unix/sysv/i386 nptl/sysdeps/unix/sysv
sysdeps/unix/sysv sysdeps/unix/i386 nptl/sysdeps/unix sysdeps/unix
sysdeps/posix sysdeps/i386/i686/fpu nptl/sysdeps/i386/i686 sysdeps/i386/i686
sysdeps/i386/i486 nptl/sysdeps/i386/i486 sysdeps/i386/fpu nptl/sysdeps/i386
sysdeps/i386 sysdeps/wordsize-32 sysdeps/ieee754/ldbl-96 sysdeps/ieee754/dbl-64
sysdeps/ieee754/flt-32 sysdeps/ieee754 sysdeps/generic/elf sysdeps/generic';
\
for dir in sysdeps/i386/elf nptl/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/i386/i686
sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/i386/i686 nptl/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/i386
sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/i386 nptl/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux nptl/sysdeps/pthread
sysdeps/pthread sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux sysdeps/gnu sysdeps/unix/common
sysdeps/unix/mman sysdeps/unix/inet sysdeps/unix/sysv/i386
nptl/sysdeps/unix/sysv sysdeps/unix/sysv sysdeps/unix/i386 nptl/sysdeps/unix
sysdeps/unix sysdeps/posix sysdeps/i386/i686/fpu nptl/sysdeps/i386/i686
sysdeps/i386/i686 sysdeps/i386/i486 nptl/sysdeps/i386/i486 sysdeps/i386/fpu
nptl/sysdeps/i386 sysdeps/i386 sysdeps/wordsize-32 sysdeps/ieee754/ldbl-96
sysdeps/ieee754/dbl-64 sysdeps/ieee754/flt-32 sysdeps/ieee754
sysdeps/generic/elf sysdeps/generic; do \
case $dir in \
/*) ;; \
*) dir=\$(..)$dir ;; \
esac; \
asm='.S .s'; \
\
for o in .o .os .op .og .ob .oS; do\
set % % rtld-% % m_% s_% ptw-% %;\
while [ $# -ge 2 ]; do \
t=$1; shift; \
d=$1; shift; \
v=${t%%%}; [ x$v = x ] || v=\$(${v}CPPFLAGS); \
for s in $asm .c; do \
echo \$(objpfx)$t$o: $dir/$d$s \$(before-compile); \
echo \$(compile-command$s) $v;\
done; \
done;\
done; \
echo \$(inst_includedir)/%.h: $dir/%.h \$(+force); \
echo\$(do-install); \
done;\
echo 'sysd-rules-done = t') /mnt/lfs/sources/glibc-build/sysd-rulesT
mv -f /mnt/lfs/sources/glibc-build/sysd-rulesT
Re: Glibc Make Error - Pass 1, Chapter 5.7, LFS Book 6.6
On 08/06/10 10:05, Rademaker, Pascal (Dealis) wrote: mawk: scripts/gen-sorted.awk: line 19: regular expression compile failed (bad class -- [], [^] or [) /[^ mawk: scripts/gen-sorted.awk: line 19: syntax error at or near ] mawk: scripts/gen-sorted.awk: line 19: runaway regular expression /, , subd ... Read the preface http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/6.6/prologue/hostreqs.html You need to install gawk. Mawk can't compile glibc. Andy -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
AW: Glibc Make Error - Pass 1, Chapter 5.7, LFS Book 6.6
Ups, that could be the point! Many, many thanks Andy!!! I will report again, but I guess, that´s it! Greetings Pascal -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: lfs-support-boun...@linuxfromscratch.org [mailto:lfs-support-boun...@linuxfromscratch.org] Im Auftrag von Andrew Benton Gesendet: Dienstag, 8. Juni 2010 12:28 An: lfs-support@linuxfromscratch.org Betreff: Re: Glibc Make Error - Pass 1, Chapter 5.7, LFS Book 6.6 On 08/06/10 10:05, Rademaker, Pascal (Dealis) wrote: mawk: scripts/gen-sorted.awk: line 19: regular expression compile failed (bad class -- [], [^] or [) /[^ mawk: scripts/gen-sorted.awk: line 19: syntax error at or near ] mawk: scripts/gen-sorted.awk: line 19: runaway regular expression /, , subd ... Read the preface http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/6.6/prologue/hostreqs.html You need to install gawk. Mawk can't compile glibc. Andy -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: LFS-6.6, Stage2, glibc, nscd.c:442
On 07/06/10 16:35, linux fan wrote:
# Hack to solve glibc __stack_chk_guard cross compile ( 2.4 :)
# this schpeel in LFS-6.6 ch5 gcc-pass1 and ch5 gcc-pass2 after unpack:
glibc=$(ls /lib/libc-*.so)
read j1 v[0] v[1] v[2] j2 ${glibc//[-.]/ }
if (( v[0] 2 )) || (( v[1] 4 )) [ -f gcc/configure ]; then
shouldn't that be
if (( ${v[0]} 2 )) (( ${v[1]} 4 ))
# kick it
sed -i -e '/# Test for stack protector support in target C library/ {
a\
gcc_cv_libc_provides_ssp=yes
} ' gcc/configure
can be reduced to:
sed -i '/k prot/agcc_cv_libc_provides_ssp=yes' ../gcc-4.5.0/gcc/configure
so the whole thing can be reduced to:
v=($(ls /lib/libc-*.so | sed 's/[.-]/ /g'))
[ (( ${v[1]} 2 )) (( ${v[2]} 4 )) ]
sed -i '/k prot/agcc_cv_libc_provides_ssp=yes' ../gcc-4.5.0/gcc/configure
Sorry for picking nits. It looks good and solves a problem I had due to
one of my deviations.
Thanks
Andy
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Some LFS 6.5 - 6.6 Inconsistencies
That's not so easy. We create the book with Docbook xml. I don't know of a way to to do that. We do have both a change log and a What's new section. We are trying to do a new release every 6 months. If you look at What's new, almost every package changes each time, but most use the instructions unchanged. Yeah, I generally work off the Changelog page when updating the scripts I build everything with, working up the list from whatever date I last built against. Works for me - Changelog open in one tab, and the index in a second one. FYI. This link might be useful: http://www.sagehill.net/docbookxsl/Changebars.html -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: LFS-6.6, Stage2, glibc, nscd.c:442
On 6/8/10, Andrew Benton b3n...@gmail.com wrote:
shouldn't that be
if (( ${v[0]} 2 )) (( ${v[1]} 4 ))
or maybe (( v[0] == 2 )) (( v[1] 4 ))
... bash (( allowed me to omit $ and {} around variables/arrays ))
But in the target lfs-6.6, glibc 2.4 is true, so the test isn't even needed.
That's the funny thing. Why did they look at the host to see what will
be on the target in this stage in a cross compile situation, when they
have no way of knowing what it will be? It seems like there should be
one of those --switches allowing the user to specify a thing like
this.
Sorry for picking nits. It looks good and solves a problem I had due to
one of my deviations.
You are welcome to pick all the nits you want. I don't care.
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: LFS-6.6, Stage2, glibc, nscd.c:442
On 6/8/10, Andrew Benton b3n...@gmail.com wrote:
so the whole thing can be reduced to:
v=($(ls /lib/libc-*.so | sed 's/[.-]/ /g'))
[ (( ${v[1]} 2 )) (( ${v[2]} 4 )) ]
sed -i '/k prot/agcc_cv_libc_provides_ssp=yes' ../gcc-4.5.0/gcc/configure
[ $(ls /lib/libc-*.so \
| sed 's/[.-]/ /g' \
| awk '{print ($23 $34) ? foo : bar}') == foo ]
sed -i '/k prot/agcc_cv_libc_provides_ssp=yes' ../gcc-4.5.0/gcc/configure
Please pardon me being silly.
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Build Runlevel
I don't recall the book saying anything about it, possibly runlevel 3 is so typical it has never come up, but as I mentioned a week ago or so, I think there would be an advantage to building LFS within runlevel 2--where there's no network running, no chance of some external attack on a vulnerable system midstream. It's easier than pulling the plug. Last night I discovered the perl tests really don't like that! Some want to ping localhost, etc. I suppose it's legitimate to expect the host to provide a protected environment, but that newly minted LFS system really shouldn't be connected to a network until it's armored-up. -- Paul Rogers paulgrog...@fastmail.fm http://www.xprt.net/~pgrogers/ Rogers' Second Law: Everything you do communicates. (I do not personally endorse any additions after this line. TANSTAAFL :-) -- http://www.fastmail.fm - Same, same, but different... -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Glibc Make Error - Pass 1, Chapter 5.7, LFS Book 6.6
mawk: scripts/gen-sorted.awk: line 19: regular expression compile failed (bad class -- [], [^] or [) /[^ mawk: scripts/gen-sorted.awk: line 19: syntax error at or near ] mawk: scripts/gen-sorted.awk: line 19: runaway regular expression /, , I've never used mawk, so I'm not familiar how similar it may be to gawk, but gawk is what the Host System Requirements specify. -- Paul Rogers paulgrog...@fastmail.fm http://www.xprt.net/~pgrogers/ Rogers' Second Law: Everything you do communicates. (I do not personally endorse any additions after this line. TANSTAAFL :-) -- http://www.fastmail.fm - A fast, anti-spam email service. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Build Runlevel
Paul Rogers wrote: I don't recall the book saying anything about it, possibly runlevel 3 is so typical it has never come up, but as I mentioned a week ago or so, I think there would be an advantage to building LFS within runlevel 2--where there's no network running, no chance of some external attack on a vulnerable system midstream. It's easier than pulling the plug. Last night I discovered the perl tests really don't like that! Some want to ping localhost, etc. I suppose it's legitimate to expect the host to provide a protected environment, but that newly minted LFS system really shouldn't be connected to a network until it's armored-up. I understand your concern, but armored-up is really not necessary. In order to make any type of connection to the new system, a process must be listening to a port. There are no such processes in lfs. The ping of localhost is not technically a TCP/IP process. It never goes on the wire. After boot, the telnet, ftp, and some other clients are available, but we specifically --disable-servers in inetutils. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Some LFS 6.5 - 6.6 Inconsistencies
Neal Murphy wrote: That's not so easy. We create the book with Docbook xml. I don't know of a way to to do that. We do have both a change log and a What's new section. We are trying to do a new release every 6 months. If you look at What's new, almost every package changes each time, but most use the instructions unchanged. Yeah, I generally work off the Changelog page when updating the scripts I build everything with, working up the list from whatever date I last built against. Works for me - Changelog open in one tab, and the index in a second one. FYI. This link might be useful: http://www.sagehill.net/docbookxsl/Changebars.html Thanks. That may be doable, but it looks like a fairly significant effort to get all the details right. The html doesn't support change bars, but changes can be highlighted in color/underlining, etc. My thought would be to to show additions and changes, but hide deletions. I added a ticket at low priority so we don't forget about this. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Glibc Make Error - Pass 1, Chapter 5.7, LFS Book 6.6
On Tuesday 08 June 2010 11:48:52 Paul Rogers wrote: mawk: scripts/gen-sorted.awk: line 19: regular expression compile failed (bad class -- [], [^] or [) /[^ mawk: scripts/gen-sorted.awk: line 19: syntax error at or near ] mawk: scripts/gen-sorted.awk: line 19: runaway regular expression /, , I've never used mawk, so I'm not familiar how similar it may be to gawk, but gawk is what the Host System Requirements specify. mawk isn't all that compatible with original AKW awk. Yes, I'm still using my 1988 edition of their AWK programming language book. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
live and learn
Hi, Started reading and doing what the book says (6.6). Didn't take too long before I got myself into trouble. :-( In Host system Requirements, the instructions explicitly wants '/bin/sh' to be pointing to bash. Mine was pointing to dash. So I endeavoured to change it by deleting the symlink and then create another symlink to point to bash. However, being a naive newbie all hell broke loose when I deleted the symlink, and everything was misbehaving. So, before I realized what I had done I logged out rebooted and then couldn't log back in anymore. Sooo...before I do something else that I'm not suppose to do, I thought I'd get advise first. My thinking is that I need to get a Linux rescue or recovery CD, mount the file system on the hard drive, and then add a symlink to bash. Make sense or is there an easier way? Any recommendations on a rescue disk? One more thing. Seeing that this is a very risky thing to be advising in LFS 6.6, can I suggest that the authour(s) add some caveats around this instruction? thanx /carl h. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: live and learn
piper.guy1 wrote: Hi, Started reading and doing what the book says (6.6). Didn't take too long before I got myself into trouble. :-( In Host system Requirements, the instructions explicitly wants '/bin/sh' to be pointing to bash. Mine was pointing to dash. So I endeavoured to change it by deleting the symlink and then create another symlink to point to bash. However, being a naive newbie all hell broke loose when I deleted the symlink, and everything was misbehaving. So, before I realized what I had done I logged out rebooted and then couldn't log back in anymore. Yes that's a problem. It's an opportunity to learn. The correct command is: ln -sfv bash /bin/sh The options are -s symbolic link -f remove existing destination file -v verbose Sooo...before I do something else that I'm not suppose to do, I thought I'd get advise first. My thinking is that I need to get a Linux rescue or recovery CD, mount the file system on the hard drive, and then add a symlink to bash. Make sense or is there an easier way? Any recommendations on a rescue disk? Any disk that boots to Linux. Mount the old partition and adjust the path in the ln command for the mount point. For example: # Your installed root partition is /dev/sda2 mount /dev/sda2 /mnt ln -sfv bash /mnt/bin/sh umount /mnt One more thing. Seeing that this is a very risky thing to be advising in LFS 6.6, can I suggest that the authour(s) add some caveats around this instruction? LFS is not intended to teach basic Unix/Linux commands. -- bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: live and learn
On 8 June 2010 21:08, piper.guy1 piper.g...@gmail.com wrote: Sooo...before I do something else that I'm not suppose to do, I thought I'd get advise first. My thinking is that I need to get a Linux rescue or recovery CD, mount the file system on the hard drive, and then add a symlink to bash. Make sense or is there an easier way? If you have your install CD, or probably any 'Live' CD, that should be adequate to do this. If not, I like systemrescuecd [ http://www.sysresccd.org/ for details ] - download from http://sourceforge.net/projects/systemrescuecd/ I don't see any obvious alternative way of fixing your broken host's /bin/sh. ĸen -- After tragedy, and farce, OMG poneys! -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: live and learn
piper.guy1 wrote:
Hi,
Started reading and doing what the book says (6.6). Didn't take too
long before I got myself into trouble. :-(
Hee hee! Aren't we having fun! Before starting in on something
like this, be sure your backup and recovery procedure works well.
So, join the explicitly non exclusive club of those who have
porked their systems. One time when I was building LFS using the
alongside hint, I decided to start over, and after exiting the
chroot environment, but with the chroot environment mounts still in
place, as root, I
# cd LFS/6.3
# rm -rf build
and deleted /dev from my host system! No discs, no printers, no
terminals, etc. I rebooted with a Knoppix disc, let it populate
/dev, and then mounted my hard drive, and copied (yes copied
using cp) /dev onto my hard drive. That got my system up enough
to find out how /dev got built on my distro from a helpful
distro e-mail support group, and get it back again. No udev on
this machine, so it was definitely a little adventure.
In Host system Requirements, the instructions explicitly wants
'/bin/sh' to be pointing to bash. Mine was pointing to dash. So I
endeavoured to change it by deleting the symlink and then create
another symlink to point to bash. However, being a naive newbie all
hell broke loose when I deleted the symlink, and everything was
misbehaving. So, before I realized what I had done I logged out
rebooted and then couldn't log back in anymore.
Yeah, deleting the link without changing your /etc/passwd entry
to point to a valid shell would do that.
Sooo...before I do something else that I'm not suppose to do, I
thought I'd get advise first. My thinking is that I need to get a
Linux rescue or recovery CD, mount the file system on the hard drive,
and then add a symlink to bash. Make sense or is there an easier way?
That seems like the most obvious way to put the system back the
way it was. If you want to get the system more prepared for
the future, you could change the entry in /etc/passwd for your
login to point to /bin/dash or whatever for all users you actually
need to use, like root, yourself, and lfs or whoever. You could
then install /bin/bash and make the symlink point to that.
Another way would be to put in the symlink to /bin/dash, build
and install /bin/bash, and then repoint the symlink. Then try
logging out and back in, and see if you get some traction.
This can be done with another login still active, so you can
do some test, without porking your machine, having another
login to put things back.
Any recommendations on a rescue disk?
I like Knoppix Vers 5.x So far, I'm not so impressed with Knoppix
Vers 6. Kanotix is another which is pretty good. I've also used
sysrescuecd, which has another set of tools. Almost anything which
can boot, recognize your disc, and make a symlink is enough. That'll
be any LiveCD version of Linux. You can have a look here
http://www.livecdlist.com/
and find one which suits your fancy. I like Puppy Linux for some stuff.
Feather Linux is pretty good, though I don't like it as much. I
like DSL a lot, and it should be capable of doing what you want.
The small distros like that have the advantage of not taking so long
to download. I've run DSL on an AMD 586 (486 class machine) with
only 16Meg of RAM, and no capability to boot from a CD-ROM, by using
SMB (smart boot manager) on a floppy.
So, nearly anything can get DSL up and running. It's a nice lean system.
One more thing. Seeing that this is a very risky thing to be advising
in LFS 6.6, can I suggest that the authour(s) add some caveats around
this instruction?
Hmm. LFS is not for newbies. It would be difficult to put in
explicit enough instructions for a newbie to follow, without
making the instructions somewhat distro dependent. It's not
my call, anyway, since I'm just another LFS booster, not on
the support team.
Besides, porking your main machine to the point where it won't
boot, and figuring out how to get it back is half the fun, isn't
it? :-)
Mike
--
p=p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);};main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
Oppose globalization and One World Governments like the UN.
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
You have found the bank of Larn.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: live and learn
On 08/06/10 21:54, Mike McCarty wrote: piper.guy1 wrote: Sooo...before I do something else that I'm not suppose to do, I thought I'd get advise first. My thinking is that I need to get a Linux rescue or recovery CD, mount the file system on the hard drive, and then add a symlink to bash. Make sense or is there an easier way? That seems like the most obvious way to put the system back the way it was. If you want to get the system more prepared for the future, you could change the entry in /etc/passwd for your login to point to /bin/dash or whatever for all users you actually need to use, like root, yourself, and lfs or whoever. Safer than editing /etc/passwd by hand is to use the command usermod (read man usermod). Eg (as root) usermod -s /bin/bash $USERNAME Andy -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: live and learn
I haven't read where piper.guy confirmed that bash is installed or that if bash is not installed, that changing the link to point to bash won't help. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: live and learn
linux fan wrote: I haven't read where piper.guy confirmed that bash is installed or that if bash is not installed, that changing the link to point to bash won't help. I don't know of a distro that doesn't install bash by default unless you are using tomsrtbt. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: HSR's
[ $(ls /lib/libc-*.so \
| sed 's/[.-]/ /g' \ awk '{print ($23 $34) ? foo : bar}') ==
| foo ]
sed -i '/k prot/agcc_cv_libc_provides_ssp=yes' ../gcc-
4.5.0/gcc/configure
Please pardon me being silly.
I think you'd've LOVED APL!
This is better than one sed to insert no- in nscd's Makefile, then
rerunning the glibc build after gcc? If and when a workaround is
needed. Guess I'm old school. ;-)
I understand your concern, but armored-up is really not necessary.
Not when I pull the plug, it's not! ;-) (Old school, again.)
In order to make any type of connection to the new system, a process
must be listening to a port. There are no such processes in lfs. The
ping of localhost is not technically a TCP/IP process. It never goes
on the wire.
Certainly. At some point in further building it may happen that there
is a running network before it's ready to meet the world. Better, in
general, to build standalone until fully armored. Start that way and
it's easy to stay that way through BLFS installation. I built my LFS-
4.1 off a RHL-6.1 system. They start the network, THEN they start the
firewall. People make mistakes like this all the time. It's a PITA to
get to this box's NIC connector, seemed like runlevel 2 was easier.
After boot, the telnet, ftp, and some other clients are available, but
we specifically --disable-servers in inetutils.
True, and I took the extra step of disabling the r* builds.
I've never used mawk, so I'm not familiar how similar it may be to
gawk, but gawk is what the Host System Requirements specify.
mawk isn't all that compatible with original AKW awk.
After all I've been through, and put you all through, I'd BETTER be one
that notes gawk is required, eh? ;-)
In Host system Requirements, the instructions explicitly wants
'/bin/sh' to be pointing to bash. Mine was pointing to dash. So I
endeavoured to change it by deleting the symlink and then create
another symlink to point to bash. However, being a naive newbie all
You can minimize the interval with ln -sf bash /bin/sh. Then it
stomps on the old link to dash and there's no appreciable interval when
there's no /bin/sh--but it's still not to be advised when it's a shell
something in your tty branch might have run you're messing with!
hell broke loose when I deleted the symlink, and everything was
misbehaving. So, before I realized what I had done I logged out
rebooted and then couldn't log back in anymore.
Betcha don't do that nomore! ;-)
Sooo...before I do something else that I'm not suppose to do, I
thought I'd get advise first. My thinking is that I need to get a
Linux rescue or recovery CD, mount the file system on the hard drive,
and then add a symlink to bash. Make sense or is there an easier way?
Any recommendations on a rescue disk?
What have you got? Tom's root boot (RTBT) runs on a floppy. Knoppix?
If you don't have a Knoppix LiveCD, you should. Virtually any LiveCD
should do.
--
Paul Rogers
paulgrog...@fastmail.fm
http://www.xprt.net/~pgrogers/
Rogers' Second Law: Everything you do communicates.
(I do not personally endorse any additions after this line. TANSTAAFL :-)
--
http://www.fastmail.fm - The way an email service should be
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: live and learn
Mike McCarty wrote: # cd LFS/6.3 # rm -rf build and deleted /dev from my host system! No discs, no printers, no terminals, etc. I rebooted with a Knoppix disc, let it populate /dev, and then mounted my hard drive, and copied (yes copied using cp) /dev onto my hard drive. I don't think that would not be the case today since udev mounts a tempfs on top of /dev and populates it upon boot. See 6.2.2. Mounting and Populating /dev. At one time, what you did would have been needed. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: live and learn
Mike McCarty wrote: Yeah, deleting the link without changing your /etc/passwd entry to point to a valid shell would do that. Changing the /etc/password file won't do much. The bootscripts need /bin/sh. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: live and learn
On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 5:50 PM, linux fan linuxscra...@gmail.com wrote: I haven't read where piper.guy confirmed that bash is installed or that if bash is not installed, that changing the link to point to bash won't help. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page Oh yes, it's there. I did confirm that bash was there before my calamity. /carl h. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: HSR's
On Tuesday 08 June 2010 19:04:21 Paul Rogers wrote: You can minimize the interval with ln -sf bash /bin/sh. Then it stomps on the old link to dash and there's no appreciable interval when there's no /bin/sh--but it's still not to be advised when it's a shell something in your tty branch might have run you're messing with! This is somewhat true. The running shell will not be affected. Subsequent attempts to run that shell will fail. It's been a long time since shell scripts were 'cached' in the filesystem such that editting a script would cause the running script to fail. And it's likely been nearly as long since an executing binary has been 'cached' on its filesystem. Linux deletes the file from the FS, but keeps it available to all processes that have it open. It is deleted and forgotten when the last open FD is closed. So if you are running /bin/bash and you delete /bin/bash, your shell will continue to run until it closes the FD that has /bin/bash opened. Put differently, it is deleted from the FS directory and from the in-cache directory, but it cannot be deleted completely until the last process closes the FD. In a way, it is an orphan during the interim; it cannot be opened anew, but it can continue to be processed until the last FD that has it open is closed. So, in the case that spawned this thread, the used could have continued to use his shell, albeit vey carefully and judiciously, until he exitted that shell. Even if he performed an 'rm -rf /', his shell would continue to run and he would continue to be able to use shell built-ins until he exitted that shell. At that point, only the root directory, '.' and '..' would be accessible. Confused? Read up on tmpfs and how initramfs works. Hint: they both work with *no* filesystem structure, just directories and files with no backing store. They're one step removed from a RAM disk with a file structure layered on top. Were I to agree with software patents, this might be one of them. Another hint: it is what allows LiveCD Linux systems to run completely in RAM. Also read up on how file access works. When you open a file, you do not open the file on disk (normally). You ask the system to open the file for you. It creates an entry in the cache directory for that file, pages the file into memory over time, and allows you to access the file. When you close the file, it stays in cache until something else needs the memory more urgently. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: live and learn
On Tuesday 08 June 2010 16:54:52 Mike McCarty wrote: piper.guy1 wrote: One more thing. Seeing that this is a very risky thing to be advising in LFS 6.6, can I suggest that the authour(s) add some caveats around this instruction? The best way to do LFS is to pretend you are the computer, executing each command and understanding what each command does. In short time, you'll come to recognize what is happening and learn to pause before you hit the ENTER key. Been there, done that. Hmmm. May I produce a t-shirt that proclaims, Member of the 'I hosed my Linux system building LFS!' club ?? Besides, porking your main machine to the point where it won't boot, and figuring out how to get it back is half the fun, isn't it? :-) It's fun the first couple times. :) Then it just becomes tedious and a pain to figure out how to avoid it in the future. :D In a way, LFS is instructionary (as intended). If you do *exactly* what the book says, the probability is high that you will succeed and not hose your host system. I started playing with UNIX in 1986, and Linux in the mid-nineties. And just a couple weeks ago, I overwrote a disk that contained half of a couple striped MD filesystems. Lost nearly 10 years of pics and history. Another time, while redesigning the Smoothwall build system, I overwrote large bits of my host system because the build system did what I *told* it to do, not what I *wanted* it to do. Sigh. I *meant* to copy an external drive's image to a partition, *not* the whole drive. So if all you did was wipe out a link to a shell, you haven't tried hard enough. :) Almost any Linux distro that has a rescue mode (even Debian's netinstall CD will work, and its much quicker) will allow you to boot into a usable Linux and repair such minor damage. - boot the live or rescue system - don't use your host's FS as root - mount your host's root FS and/or /usr FS, as needed - find what you hosed and any alternatives - create a symlink from that which you lost to an alternative For example, if you deleted the symlink to dash, you can create a new link to dash. If you wiped out dash itself, you can create a symlink to just about anything that will act as a shell. Tclsh would do in a pinch; even perl or php would work. At the worst, you might have to find and download the bash/dash/csh/tcsh package, learn to unarchive it, and replace only what you deleted. You could get lucky and find the package cached in a package archive area, as you'd find in at least Debian or Ubuntu (an ancient African word meaning can't install Debian). And, yes, I have done 'rm -rf *' when in the root directory on my old ATT UNIXPC. I've since learned to be more careful. But, clearly, not careful enough. :) Just remember, it's only a computer. It can be restored to proper operating condition. In time, you'll learn to keep your personal data on a separate filesystem. You'll learn to pause before hitting ENTER. And in time you'll wonder why you stuck with Winders or Mac so long. '97-02, I used BeOS as my primary system. For a short time, I used Windows after, until Debian Etch was release. I've been using Linux as my primary system ever since. As Mike says, LFS is not for newbies. Though I might allow that it is not for newbies who have only one computer. Keep a computer, any computer, handy for internet access to search for the mistakes you make and how others have recovered. At least technically, we humans learn from our mistakes and are usually willing to help teach others to avoid and/or recover from theirs. Often you'll get a respone that details how to recover. Other times, you get a response like, There, there. This, too, shall pass. So welcome to the world of virtual reality, where the all that exists are meaningless bits. It is all virtual; none of it is tangible. It is there to be moulded to our own individual desires. In the future, pay close attention to *each* step of LFS. And be sure to follow each step *exactly*. [Fest3er steps off his soapbox and puts it away.] A possible future enhancement to 'the book' might be to incorporate checkboxes that a newbie would check off as she performs each step. Extra work? Yes. But worth it to make each step clearer? Yes again. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: live and learn
On Tuesday 08 June 2010 18:57:21 Bruce Dubbs wrote: Mike McCarty wrote: # cd LFS/6.3 # rm -rf build and deleted /dev from my host system! No discs, no printers, no terminals, etc. I rebooted with a Knoppix disc, let it populate /dev, and then mounted my hard drive, and copied (yes copied using cp) /dev onto my hard drive. I don't think that would not be the case today since udev mounts a tempfs on top of /dev and populates it upon boot. See 6.2.2. Mounting and Populating /dev. At one time, what you did would have been needed. But later, Mike says his system does not have udev. If Mike had known the 'basic' /dev entries needed, he probably could have used mknod to create them. He could have booted some Linux in a virtual system, archived /dev, copied it to the system he crippled and unarchived it. To quote an old SF TV show, Many such journeys are possible. :) :) -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: live and learn
Neal Murphy wrote: I started playing with UNIX in 1986, and Linux in the mid-nineties. And just a couple weeks ago, I overwrote a disk that contained half of a couple striped MD filesystems. Lost nearly 10 years of pics and history. No backups? How is this different (in effect) from a failed disk drive. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: live and learn
On Tuesday 08 June 2010 20:05:46 Bruce Dubbs wrote: Neal Murphy wrote: I started playing with UNIX in 1986, and Linux in the mid-nineties. And just a couple weeks ago, I overwrote a disk that contained half of a couple striped MD filesystems. Lost nearly 10 years of pics and history. No backups? How is this different (in effect) from a failed disk drive. It differs in that I keep an eye on my hard drives. When they start to show signs of old age and failure, I buy a replacement and move everything to the new drive. (Euthenasia doesn't apply to hard drives.) I've been close to a drive failure (an 'older' WD 30GB drive), but heard it struggling to read and decided I should buy a replacement. And back when 1TB drives reached $80US, I bought two Hitachi SATA 3s to replace the perfectly functional and problem-free 400GB Apple SATA 1.5s I'd bought a few years years earlier; I needed more disk space. Alas, wiping out data is *not* the preferred method of acquiring more disk space. :( Of course, it didn't help that my ASUS dual dual-core Opteron mboard on-board power supply capacitors gave up their ghosts; that's when I bought the new mboard and a quad PhII 965 and 8GB RAM. (I truly *despise* waiting for Linux distribs to compile.) But you are right. I had no backups and no excuses. I have an empty 400GB drive that would have held most of that data. And there's no reason I could not have saved all the pics to DVDs. I didn't. I lost. Oh, well. No one died, and no critters or humans were harmed, so no foul. :) Too bad I didn't wipe out my ripped CDs. I could've re-ripped them. Sigh. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: live and learn
On Tue, 8 Jun 2010 16:08:18 -0400 In Host system Requirements, the instructions explicitly wants '/bin/sh' to be pointing to bash. Mine was pointing to dash. under Ubuntu, try sudo dpkg-reconfigure dash. Any recommendations on a rescue disk? CDlinux. ( http://cdlinux.info/ ) PS: try virtual machine as your LFS building host. It will keep you real physical machine safe. -- littlebat dashing.m...@gmail.com -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
