[lfs-support] LFS Issues with Windows 8
Hello all, I have been transferring an LFS system on a USB drive around various computers and it works for all except a new laptop running Windows 8. In that case, the BIOS (or is it UEFI?) does not read (or reads and discards) the grub loader on the USB. There is no way to select the USB drive as a booting option. I have plugged in other USBs with Ubuntu and Fedora on this same laptop and they are recognized. I think this has something to do with the new secure boot mandate by Microsoft. The interesting thing is that in my bios settings it is displayed as disabled. What is different about the LFS system that the BIOS thinks can be malicious? Is it the kernel that needs to be officially signed or the loader (GRUB)? If this is not a secure boot issue (it does say it's disabled in bios) what else can be the problem? It probably is irrelevant but the bios on the Windows 8 laptop is Aptio 2.16. On another laptop (windows 7) I have an earlier version of Aptio (I think 2.06) and the USB is listed as boot option. Any insight will be much appreciated, Thanks -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [lfs-support] Is it a must to separate Binutils and GCC into Pass 1 and Pass 2?
On Mon, 2012-12-17 at 17:01 -0800, JIA Pei wrote: Unfortunately, the reason why I'm using the latest version of Binutils is deu to the current wget-list: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/development/wget-list However, on the book, it's still using binutils-2.22 http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/stable/chapter05/binutils-pass1.html You're mixing the stable version of the book, with the download list from the development version. Why are you doing that? 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
Re: [lfs-support] Booting LFS Error Kernel Panic
Now it would be nice for it to work using UUIDs so the booting can be independent of host system. You need to use an initrd of that. See BLFS. -- Bruce Would't using GPT instead of MBR be a viable alternative? Richard -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [lfs-support] keyboard-1.15.3 errors on backspace with uk keymap
I've got a few files at http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~ken/ in the keyboard-items and fonts directories - note that LatGrkCyr-8x16 is a 512-ish character font and ships in kbd. It comes from the sigma fonts there which are very much roll your own but do allow a 256 character font if that is what you need. ?en Thanks for the help and the link Ken; I'll have a play when I have more time. I'm still using vga=792 on the grub kernel boot line to get the right (for me) sized screen fonts. Is that still acceptable or is there an alternative? Richard -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [lfs-support] Is it a must to separate Binutils and GCC into Pass 1 and Pass 2?
Restart building all of your tools, pay attention to the cp command, it requires admin privileges. On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 7:22 PM, Simon Geard delga...@ihug.co.nz wrote: On Mon, 2012-12-17 at 17:01 -0800, JIA Pei wrote: Unfortunately, the reason why I'm using the latest version of Binutils is deu to the current wget-list: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/development/wget-list However, on the book, it's still using binutils-2.22 http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/stable/chapter05/binutils-pass1.html You're mixing the stable version of the book, with the download list from the development version. Why are you doing that? Simon. -- 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-support] Is it a must to separate Binutils and GCC into Pass 1 and Pass 2?
Hi, Simon: The reason why I'm doing that (use binutils-2.23.1 instead of binutils-2.22) is I don't want to 100% strictly follow LFS book, so that I might be able to understand how to build my own Linux deeper. And, even now, I've got no idea why we need to patch binutils ?? Because without patching binutils, I'm still able to pass BinUtils Pass 1 Any further suggestions please? Cheers Pei On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 2:22 AM, Simon Geard delga...@ihug.co.nz wrote: On Mon, 2012-12-17 at 17:01 -0800, JIA Pei wrote: Unfortunately, the reason why I'm using the latest version of Binutils is deu to the current wget-list: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/development/wget-list However, on the book, it's still using binutils-2.22 http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/stable/chapter05/binutils-pass1.html You're mixing the stable version of the book, with the download list from the development version. Why are you doing that? Simon. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page -- Pei JIA Email: jp4w...@gmail.com cell:+1 604-362-5816 Welcome to Vision Open http://www.visionopen.com -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [lfs-support] Is it a must to separate Binutils and GCC into Pass 1 and Pass 2?
On 12/18/2012 07:51 AM, JIA Pei wrote: Hi, Simon: The reason why I'm doing that (use binutils-2.23.1 instead of binutils-2.22) is I don't want to 100% strictly follow LFS book, so that I might be able to understand how to build my own Linux deeper. And, even now, I've got no idea why we need to patch binutils ?? Because without patching binutils, I'm still able to pass BinUtils Pass 1 The book itself quite clearly explains what the patch does. If you *really* want to learn then start by, for example, reading the patch itself to see how exactly it works. However, since you still felt to need to ask, for example, if Binutils/GCC Pass 2 was necessary, despite the fact that the build process is thoroughly explained, it appears you aren't really making much of an effort to read the information that's already there. If you really do want to learn start off by - as I've said to you at least twice before - actually reading all the text in the book. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
[lfs-support] Glibc installation in target machine fails
Hi, I successfully chrooted my target machine and I passed all the way upto man-page installation, and I stepped into glibc(chapter 6.9). I performed all the steps till make without any error after entering the make check command Its giving me an error. COMMAND ENTERED*: make -k check 21 | tee glibc-check-log grep Error glibc-check-log * ERROR: * diff -p -U 0 ../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/i386/nptl/libc.abilist /sources/glibc-build/libc.symlist --- ../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/i386/nptl/libc.abilist2012-06-30 19:12:34.0 + +++ /sources/glibc-build/libc.symlist2012-12-18 11:30:50.0 + @@ -261 +261 @@ GLIBC_2.0 - _nl_default_dirname D 0x12 + _nl_default_dirname D 0x4a make[2]: *** [check-abi-libc] Error 1 make[2]: Leaving directory `/sources/glibc-2.16.0/elf' make[1]: *** [elf/tests] Error 2 make[1]: Leaving directory `/sources/glibc-2.16.0' make: *** [check] Error 2 * Since its a check, I ignored it and I performed with the next step that's *make install* even this fails and throw me an error as * *ERROR*: make[2]: *** No rule to make target `/usr/--disable-profile--enable-add-ons--enable-kernel=2.6.25/lib/libBrokenLocale.so', needed by `install-lib-nosubdir'. Stop. make[2]: Leaving directory `/sources/glibc-2.16.0/locale' make[1]: *** [locale/subdir_install] Error 2 make[1]: Leaving directory `/sources/glibc-2.16.0' make: *** [install] Error 2* could someone assist me resolve this. -- With Regards... PRABHU :) -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [lfs-support] Glibc installation in target machine fails
On 12/18/2012 08:25 AM, Prabhu wrote: Hi, Since its a check, I ignored it and I performed with the next step that's *make install* even this fails and throw me an error as * *ERROR*: make[2]: *** No rule to make target `/usr/--disable-profile--enable-add-ons--enable-kernel=2.6.25/lib/libBrokenLocale.so', needed by `install-lib-nosubdir'. Stop. make[2]: Leaving directory `/sources/glibc-2.16.0/locale' make[1]: *** [locale/subdir_install] Error 2 make[1]: Leaving directory `/sources/glibc-2.16.0' make: *** [install] Error 2* could someone assist me resolve this. -- With Regards... PRABHU :) Looks like it thinks it was given an odd prefix. There was probably a typo on the configure command. Can you check your command history and paste the exact configure command you gave? -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [lfs-support] Is it a must to separate Binutils and GCC into Pass 1 and Pass 2?
Hi, Thank you Chris. Thanks for your reply. I now understand a bit more about why we need Binutils Pass 1 and Pass 2. However, I still prefer using Binutils 2.23.1, does that mean I'll have to create my own patch for Binutils-2.23.1?? Are you planning to afford the patches to all newest needed packages? Thanks again. Merry Christmas ^_^ Pei On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 5:04 AM, Chris Staub ch...@beaker67.com wrote: On 12/18/2012 07:51 AM, JIA Pei wrote: Hi, Simon: The reason why I'm doing that (use binutils-2.23.1 instead of binutils-2.22) is I don't want to 100% strictly follow LFS book, so that I might be able to understand how to build my own Linux deeper. And, even now, I've got no idea why we need to patch binutils ?? Because without patching binutils, I'm still able to pass BinUtils Pass 1 The book itself quite clearly explains what the patch does. If you *really* want to learn then start by, for example, reading the patch itself to see how exactly it works. However, since you still felt to need to ask, for example, if Binutils/GCC Pass 2 was necessary, despite the fact that the build process is thoroughly explained, it appears you aren't really making much of an effort to read the information that's already there. If you really do want to learn start off by - as I've said to you at least twice before - actually reading all the text in the book. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page -- Pei JIA Email: jp4w...@gmail.com cell:+1 604-362-5816 Welcome to Vision Open http://www.visionopen.com -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [lfs-support] Is it a must to separate Binutils and GCC into Pass 1 and Pass 2?
JIA Pei wrote: Hi, Thank you Chris. Thanks for your reply. I now understand a bit more about why we need Binutils Pass 1 and Pass 2. However, I still prefer using Binutils 2.23.1, does that mean I'll have to create my own patch for Binutils-2.23.1?? Are you planning to afford the patches to all newest needed packages? Just use the development book if you want to use the latest packages. http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/development/ -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [lfs-support] Booting LFS Error Kernel Panic
On 18/12/12 01:24, Alexander Spitzer wrote:
Hello all,
I am having a hard time booting my LFS system, which is on a USB
drive. I installed grub on /dev/sdc (the usb relative to the host) and
the bios successfully finds GRUB. After around 2.3 seconds, the boot
process hangs after printing what I believe to be a trace call.
Interestingly, one time when I booted the trace call was short enough
for me to write down the error which I can't normally see due to the
length of the trace prints. Here is the error:
Kernel panic-not syncing: VFS: Unable to mount root fs on unknown
block(0,0)
What exactly does unknown block(0,0) mean?
The problem appears to be that the kernel can't find the root file
system. How can that be a problem, if the kernel, which is ON the root
file system, was found and ran?
Here is the grub.cfg file:
# Begin /boot/grub/grub.cfg
set default=0
set timeout=5
insmod ext2
set root=(hd0,1)
menuentry GNU/Linux, Linux 3.7-lfs-SVN-20121212 {
linux /boot/vmlinuz-3.7-lfs-SVN-20121212 root=/dev/sda1 ro
}
I believe the USB is always sda because to boot I do a manual boot
override and select USB from the BIOS menu. The grub command line also
confirms this.
Searching online, there were some suggestions that the kernel was
compiled without support for necessary file systems and hardware. I
check my config file for the kernel and found all the important
options to be set to yes (USB_mass_storage, ext3 filesystem, USB UHCI,
USB OHCI, and several scsi ones). There are however many USB options
that are not set. Are there any specific ones that should be set for
the kernel to load the root filesystem?
Also, I've tried unsuccessfully to read more of the boot output by two
methods: increasing the resolution and scrolling back. The scroll back
buffer is set to yes in the kernel config yet shift page down and
shift page up do nothing. Also, vga=791 is deprecated and I haven't
been able to get any effect by using set vgxpayload=1024x728.
How can I read the boot print outputs without a high speed camera?
Thanks,
Alex
Hi
This is my grub.cfg which is on usb drive that works
# Begin /boot/grub/grub.cfg
set default=0
set timeout=5
insmod ext2
set root=(hd0,1)
menuentry Planet-Spike7 {
linux /boot/vmlinuz-3.2-lfs-7.0 root=/dev/sdc1 rootdelay=5 ro
}
the rootdelay seems to be the cure tou might want to try 10 instaed of 5
then adjust it.
It takes time for the usb to recognised
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [lfs-support] keyboard-1.15.3 errors on backspace with uk keymap
On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 11:41:38AM +, Richard Melville wrote: Thanks for the help and the link Ken; I'll have a play when I have more time. I'm still using vga=792 on the grub kernel boot line to get the right (for me) sized screen fonts. Is that still acceptable or is there an alternative? On my server I still use that. On one of my desktops I use video=1024x768. ISTR that grub moans about vga= but it still works. ĸen -- das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [lfs-support] Is it a must to separate Binutils and GCC into Pass 1 and Pass 2?
Thank you so much Bruce... I proceed to expect 5.45 now But, I got two test fails as follows. Is this normal? * expect-1.8b default remove null behavior FAILED* * Contents of test case:* * * *spawn cat $filename* *expect ab* *set rc [regexp $expect_out(buffer) ab]* *wait* *set rc* * * * Result was:* *0* * Result should have been (exact matching):* *1* * expect-1.8b FAILED* * * * * * * * expect-1.9 match null inline FAILED* * Contents of test case:* * * *spawn cat $filename* *remove_nulls 0* *expect a\ub* *set rc [regexp $expect_out(buffer) a\ub]* *close* *wait* *set rc* * * * Result was:* *0* * Result should have been (exact matching):* *1* * expect-1.9 FAILED* * * *logfile.test* *via sendvia send_uservia send_stdoutvia send_ttypid.test* *send.test* *spawn.test* *stty.test* *all.tcl:Total 29 Passed 27 Skipped 0 Failed 2* *Sourced 0 Test Files.* *Files with failing tests: expect.test* Cheers Pei On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 1:14 PM, Bruce Dubbs bruce.du...@gmail.com wrote: JIA Pei wrote: Hi, Thank you Chris. Thanks for your reply. I now understand a bit more about why we need Binutils Pass 1 and Pass 2. However, I still prefer using Binutils 2.23.1, does that mean I'll have to create my own patch for Binutils-2.23.1?? Are you planning to afford the patches to all newest needed packages? Just use the development book if you want to use the latest packages. http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/development/ -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page -- Pei JIA Email: jp4w...@gmail.com cell:+1 604-362-5816 Welcome to Vision Open http://www.visionopen.com -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [lfs-support] Is it a must to separate Binutils and GCC into Pass 1 and Pass 2?
JIA Pei wrote: Thank you so much Bruce... I proceed to expect 5.45 now But, I got two test fails as follows. Is this normal? We do not recommend running tests in Chapter 5. They often depend on the host system and we don't know what the arbitrary user has as a host. You are on your own for tests in Chapter 5. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [lfs-support] Is it a must to separate Binutils and GCC into Pass 1 and Pass 2?
Now, fail to build check-0.9.9 ... The error message is: */mnt/lfs/tools/bin/../lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.7.2/../../../../i686-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ld: note: 'pthread_create@@GLIBC_2.1' is defined in DSO /tools/lib/libpthread.so.0 so try adding it to the linker command line* */tools/lib/libpthread.so.0: could not read symbols: Invalid operation* *collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status* *make[2]: *** [check_thread_stress] Error 1* *make[2]: Leaving directory `/mnt/lfs/sources/check-0.9.9/tests'* *make[1]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1* *make[1]: Leaving directory `/mnt/lfs/sources/check-0.9.9'* *make: *** [all] Error 2* I tried to re-configure it as mentioned in http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lfs.support/35698 namely: *$ CFLAGS=-L/tools/lib -lpthread* *$ ./configure --prefix=/tools* Problem continues, namely, the above error message is still there... How to solve this problem though? cheers Pei On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 6:18 PM, Bruce Dubbs bruce.du...@gmail.com wrote: JIA Pei wrote: Thank you so much Bruce... I proceed to expect 5.45 now But, I got two test fails as follows. Is this normal? We do not recommend running tests in Chapter 5. They often depend on the host system and we don't know what the arbitrary user has as a host. You are on your own for tests in Chapter 5. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page -- Pei JIA Email: jp4w...@gmail.com cell:+1 604-362-5816 Welcome to Vision Open http://www.visionopen.com -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [lfs-support] glibc --enable-kernel=2.6.25? why?
On Dec 16, 2012, at 8:46 AM, Michael E. Maher wrote: ‘--enable-kernel=version’ This option is currently only useful on GNU/Linux systems. The version parameter should have the form X.Y.Z and describes the smallest version of the Linux kernel the generated library is expected to support. The higher the version number is, the less compatibility code is added, and the faster the code gets. And reduces the size of the built glibc. You want to set the version to the the oldest kernel version you may ever use, even when using a livecd or distro to chroot to it. The version set in the book covers most of the latest distros. Just be careful setting it too the current kernel version unless you know for sure your host or any livecd or distro you use for recovery or administrative tasks via chroot will run the resulting glibc of the LFS build. Many people, when building LFS, will use the latest kernel version headers and enable the kernel version to the current version as they know what they are doing. If unsure, can't go wrong using what the book uses for that parameter. Sincerely, William Harrington-- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [lfs-support] Is it a must to separate Binutils and GCC into Pass 1 and Pass 2?
On 12/18/2012 09:23 PM, JIA Pei wrote: Now, fail to build check-0.9.9 ... The error message is: //mnt/lfs/tools/bin/../lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.7.2/../../../../i686-pc-linux-gnu/bin/ld: note: 'pthread_create@@GLIBC_2.1' is defined in DSO /tools/lib/libpthread.so.0 so try adding it to the linker command line/ //tools/lib/libpthread.so.0: could not read symbols: Invalid operation/ /collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status/ /make[2]: *** [check_thread_stress] Error 1/ /make[2]: Leaving directory `/mnt/lfs/sources/check-0.9.9/tests'/ /make[1]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1/ /make[1]: Leaving directory `/mnt/lfs/sources/check-0.9.9'/ /make: *** [all] Error 2/ I tried to re-configure it as mentioned in http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lfs.support/35698 namely: *$ CFLAGS=-L/tools/lib -lpthread* *$ ./configure --prefix=/tools* Problem continues, namely, the above error message is still there... How to solve this problem though? You want to learn, you figure out yourself how to fix it. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [lfs-support] Is it a must to separate Binutils and GCC into Pass 1 and Pass 2?
On 12/18/2012 09:07 PM, JIA Pei wrote: Thank you so much Bruce... I proceed to expect 5.45 now But, I got two test fails as follows. Is this normal? If you had read the book like you're expected to, you would already know the answer to this. If you can't be bothered to read it, quit wasting time here and figure it all out yourself. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
