On Mon, Jul 02, 2012 at 11:35:07AM +0800, Archie Arevalo wrote:
On Monday, July 02, 2012 04:07:49 Ken Moffat wrote:
On Mon, Jul 02, 2012 at 09:11:47AM +0800, Archie Arevalo wrote:
On Monday, July 02, 2012 01:50:44 Ken Moffat wrote:
lfs:~$ echo $LFS
/mnt/lfs
lfs:~$ echo $PATH
On Monday, July 02, 2012 13:44:00 Ken Moffat wrote:
Sorry I can't crack your problem. You have barely started the
build, so please re-read *all* the introductory text, particularly
the Host System Requirements (intro, section vii), chapter 4, and
chapter 5 up to where you are. All your
On Mon, Jul 02, 2012 at 09:08:09PM +0800, Archie Arevalo wrote:
I'm appreciative of your time and effort, Ken. Thank you.
I wouldn't mind starting over. Perhaps I should try a previous version?
Thanks. I very much doubt that an older version of the book would
be a good idea, but in an
Em 01-07-2012 15:32, Ken Moffat escreveu:
On Sun, Jul 01, 2012 at 01:16:00PM +0530, Emerson Yesupatham wrote:
[...]
If you are never going to boot a kernel older than
2.6.35, specifying 2.6.35 should be fine.
For my own desktop builds (several each year, using LFS-svn) I
reduce the
Em 01-07-2012 22:11, Archie Arevalo escreveu:
On Monday, July 02, 2012 01:50:44 Ken Moffat wrote:
On Mon, Jul 02, 2012 at 08:07:32AM +0800, Archie Arevalo wrote:
[...]
Is /tools a symlink to /mnt/lfs/tools ?
lfs:/mnt/lfs$ ls -l
total 24
drwx-- 2 root root 16384 Jun 29 17:27
On Mon, Jul 02, 2012 at 02:16:18PM -0700, Fernando de Oliveira wrote:
Em 01-07-2012 15:32, Ken Moffat escreveu:
On Sun, Jul 01, 2012 at 01:16:00PM +0530, Emerson Yesupatham wrote:
[...]
If you are never going to boot a kernel older than
2.6.35, specifying 2.6.35 should be fine.
On Mon, Jul 02, 2012 at 02:41:10PM -0700, Fernando de Oliveira wrote:
Em 01-07-2012 22:11, Archie Arevalo escreveu:
On Monday, July 02, 2012 01:50:44 Ken Moffat wrote:
On Mon, Jul 02, 2012 at 08:07:32AM +0800, Archie Arevalo wrote:
[...]
Is /tools a symlink to /mnt/lfs/tools ?
From a previous encounter with GCC, I opted to clean the slate and start all
over. It has come to my attention that the file lists - wget-list and md5sums -
did not quite download all the tarballs (patches were OK). It may just be my
net connection (I reside behind the Great Firewall) and this
Archie Arevalo wrote:
From a previous encounter with GCC, I opted to clean the slate and start all
over. It has come to my attention that the file lists - wget-list and md5sums
-
did not quite download all the tarballs (patches were OK). It may just be my
net connection (I reside behind the
