On Tue, Dec 07, 2010 at 08:18:17PM -0500, Mike Hollis wrote:
On Tue, Dec 07, 2010 at 05:13:19PM -0600, robert wrote:
In other matters, I'm setting up another machine to step thru the LFS
build ... don't know what else to do.
Since your at an impasse here , why not try installing udev
Hi.
libffi appears in the python's page like an optional dependency but the url
points to the web page of libffi, http://sourceware.org/libffi/. Like libffi
are in blfs some time ago, that url should points to the libffi page of blfs
book.
--
Rosario Turco rosario_turco at virgilio.it writes:
Ok. Thanks.
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Juan Antonio Moreno Carmona wrote these words on 12/08/10 10:24 CST:
Hi.
libffi appears in the python's page like an optional dependency but the url
points to the web page of libffi, http://sourceware.org/libffi/. Like libffi
are in blfs some time ago, that url should points to the libffi page
Rosario Turco wrote:
Sorry, my editor has removed the hyphens and spaces made.
The exact command on Fedora 14 is (all lower case):
../glibc-2.12.1/configure --prefix=/tools \
--host = $ LFS_TGT --build =$(../ glibc-2.12.1/scripts/config.guess) \
--disable-profile --enable-add-ons \
Rosario Turco rosario_turco at virgilio.it writes:
I have done the compilation without error with
../glibc-2.12.1/configure --prefix=/tools \
--host = $ LFS_TGT --build =$(../ glibc-2.12.1/scripts/config.guess) \
--disable-profile --enable-add-ons \
--enable-kernel = 2.6.22.5
On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 10:12 AM, robert mullinrob...@gmail.com wrote:
Ken Moffat wrote:
On Tue, Dec 07, 2010 at 08:18:17PM -0500, Mike Hollis wrote:
On Tue, Dec 07, 2010 at 05:13:19PM -0600, robert wrote:
In other matters, I'm setting up another machine to step thru the LFS
build ... don't
The documentation doesn't mention anything about ignoring errors (or
expecting any for that matter) so I'm not sure if I should proceed.
See the attached image (screenshot) of the error I'm getting while
issuing the command 'make install' for e2fsprogs-1.41.12.
My guess is that this error is
On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 1:00 PM, Dax Mickelson d...@daxm.net wrote:
The documentation doesn't mention anything about ignoring errors (or
expecting any for that matter) so I'm not sure if I should proceed.
See the attached image (screenshot) of the error I'm getting while
issuing the command
Rosario Turco rosario_turco at virgilio.it writes:
remove the following blanks (^) and add the missing \
../glibc-2.12.1/configure --prefix=/tools \
--host = $ LFS_TGT --build =$(../ glibc-2.12.1/scripts/config.guess) \
^ ^ ^ ^ ^
--disable-profile --enable-add-ons
On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 10:12:52AM -0600, robert wrote:
Partial output of make check:
make --no-print-directory check-recursive
Making check in .
make --no-print-directory libudev/test-libudev udev/test-udev
make[3]: `libudev/test-libudev' is up to date.
make[3]: `udev/test-udev' is up
Stuart Stegall wrote:
udev-test will run 142 tests:
FAIL: test/udev-test.pl
==
1 of 1 test failed
My system has error as expected for tests 1, 48, 81, 82, 139, 140, and
141 for udev-161.
0 errors occured
PASS: test/udev-test.pl
=
1
On Wednesday 08 December 2010 12:19:10 Rosario Turco wrote:
I have done the compilation without error with
../glibc-2.12.1/configure --prefix=/tools \
--host = $ LFS_TGT --build =$(../ glibc-2.12.1/scripts/config.guess) \
--disable-profile --enable-add-ons \
--enable-kernel = 2.6.22.5
robert wrote:
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Stuart Stegall wrote:
udev-test will run 142 tests:
FAIL: test/udev-test.pl
==
1 of 1 test failed
My system has error as expected for tests 1, 48, 81, 82, 139, 140, and
141 for udev-161.
0 errors occured
On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 03:13:58PM -0600, robert wrote:
pastebin URL:
http://pastebin.com/6jaJfxeP
Test 31 (add) - test labelled Program with subshell
plus the 'error as expected' messages for 81, 82.
Possibly, your build of bash will turn out to be damaged, or else
your host maybe has a
Ken Moffat wrote:
On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 10:12:52AM -0600, robert wrote:
Partial output of make check:
make --no-print-directory check-recursive
Making check in .
make --no-print-directory libudev/test-libudev udev/test-udev
make[3]: `libudev/test-libudev' is up to date.
make[3]:
On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 04:46:00PM -0600, robert wrote:
.config of host reveals: # CONFIG_SYSFS_DEPRECATED_V2 is not set
gcc (Ubuntu 4.4.3-4ubuntu5) 4.4.3
glibc: libc-2.11.1.so
kernel: vmlinuz-2.6.32-26-generic
Those seem adequate
what does this mean?
me hopes this isn't an example of
On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 04:48:22PM -0600, robert wrote:
Thanks everyone for the help. I do have /dev/sda5:
/dev/sda5: UUID=a6ce6f3f-7bb5-4069-a32c-a8388472f15d TYPE=ext3
You write English well, but I wonder if you have misunderstood ?
The question can be reworded as in chroot, does
Ken Moffat wrote:
On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 04:48:22PM -0600, robert wrote:
Thanks everyone for the help. I do have /dev/sda5:
/dev/sda5: UUID=a6ce6f3f-7bb5-4069-a32c-a8388472f15d TYPE=ext3
You write English well, but I wonder if you have misunderstood ?
The question can be reworded as in
Ken Moffat wrote:
On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 04:46:00PM -0600, robert wrote:
.config of host reveals: # CONFIG_SYSFS_DEPRECATED_V2 is not set
gcc (Ubuntu 4.4.3-4ubuntu5) 4.4.3
glibc: libc-2.11.1.so
kernel: vmlinuz-2.6.32-26-generic
Those seem adequate
what does this mean?
me hopes this isn't
On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 06:31:31PM -0600, robert wrote:
No, I got the me hopes part ... quite Shakespearean, in fact ... as in
methinks ...
It's the build itself part ... still don't understand what that means.
Do you mean just write up a script and cut it loose to build the os?
Attached is the output of 'make' failing. (If you need you can go to
www.daxm.net/LFS/6.7/Screenshot-6.32-make-errors.png to get it too.)
I don't even have a guess as to what to do. :-(attachment: Selection_002.png--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ:
On Wed, 8 Dec 2010 19:05:24 -0700
Dax Mickelson d...@daxm.net wrote:
Attached is the output of 'make' failing. (If you need you can go to
www.daxm.net/LFS/6.7/Screenshot-6.32-make-errors.png to get it too.)
I don't even have a guess as to what to do. :-(
According to
On Wed, 2010-12-08 at 14:55 -0700, Dax Mickelson wrote:
It seems we've been so careful to ensure no hashing occurs so far in
the build that I'm curious as to why the test 'su-tools nobody
-s /bin/bash -c make RUN_EXPENSIVE_TEST=yes check doesn't have some
sort of '+h' switch too.
Obviously
Dax Mickelson wrote:
On Wed, 8 Dec 2010 19:05:24 -0700
Dax Mickelson d...@daxm.net wrote:
Attached is the output of 'make' failing. (If you need you can go to
www.daxm.net/LFS/6.7/Screenshot-6.32-make-errors.png to get it too.)
I don't even have a guess as to what to do. :-(
According
On Thu, 09 Dec 2010 19:34:35 +1300
Simon Geard delga...@ihug.co.nz wrote:
On Wed, 2010-12-08 at 14:55 -0700, Dax Mickelson wrote:
It seems we've been so careful to ensure no hashing occurs so far in
the build that I'm curious as to why the test 'su-tools nobody
-s /bin/bash -c make
26 matches
Mail list logo
