[lfs-support] kmod-17

2014-04-21 Thread TheOldFellow
Linux From Scratch - Version SVN-20140418 Everything fine, including installation of xz, but kmod-17 clearly isn't happy with the layout of the libs for xz. root:/sources/kmod-17# make make --no-print-directory all-recursive Making all in . CC libkmod/libkmod.lo CC

[lfs-support] ACL check errors: are they important?

2014-04-21 Thread Hazel Russman
I am building a 7.5 LFS with systemd and currently working through chapter 6. Having successfully installed coreutils, I rebuilt acl and ran the test suite. Initially I got 47 errors! According to BLFS, the acl test suite requires a daemon user who is also in the bin group (currently section 6.6

Re: [lfs-support] kmod-17

2014-04-21 Thread Pierre Labastie
Le 21/04/2014 17:50, TheOldFellow a écrit : Linux From Scratch - Version SVN-20140418 Everything fine, including installation of xz, but kmod-17 clearly isn't happy with the layout of the libs for xz. root:/sources/kmod-17# make make --no-print-directory all-recursive Making all in .

Re: [lfs-support] ACL check errors: are they important?

2014-04-21 Thread Armin K.
On 04/21/2014 06:13 PM, Hazel Russman wrote: I am building a 7.5 LFS with systemd and currently working through chapter 6. Having successfully installed coreutils, I rebuilt acl and ran the test suite. Initially I got 47 errors! According to BLFS, the acl test suite requires a daemon user

Re: [lfs-support] ACL check errors: are they important?

2014-04-21 Thread Hazel Russman
On Mon, 21 Apr 2014 18:32:49 +0200 Armin K. kre...@email.com wrote: Drop the root-tests, they are broken anyways. I couldn't even get them to run with daemon user present. I didn't do the root tests. These were the standard ones invoked with make tests though of course I was logged in as root

Re: [lfs-support] kmod-17

2014-04-21 Thread TheOldFellow
Pierre Labastie wrote: Le 21/04/2014 17:50, TheOldFellow a écrit : Linux From Scratch - Version SVN-20140418 Everything fine, including installation of xz, but kmod-17 clearly isn't happy with the layout of the libs for xz. root:/sources/kmod-17# make make --no-print-directory

Re: [lfs-support] ACL check errors: are they important?

2014-04-21 Thread Pierre Labastie
Le 21/04/2014 18:13, Hazel Russman a écrit : I am building a 7.5 LFS with systemd and currently working through chapter 6. Having successfully installed coreutils, I rebuilt acl and ran the test suite. Initially I got 47 errors! According to BLFS, the acl test suite requires a daemon user

Re: [lfs-support] ACL check errors: are they important?

2014-04-21 Thread Pierre Labastie
Le 21/04/2014 18:13, Hazel Russman a écrit : I am building a 7.5 LFS with systemd and currently working through chapter 6. Having successfully installed coreutils, I rebuilt acl and ran the test suite. Initially I got 47 errors! According to BLFS, the acl test suite requires a daemon user

Re: [lfs-support] ACL check errors: are they important?

2014-04-21 Thread Pierre Labastie
Le 21/04/2014 19:25, Pierre Labastie a écrit : Le 21/04/2014 18:13, Hazel Russman a écrit : I am building a 7.5 LFS with systemd and currently working through chapter 6. Having successfully installed coreutils, I rebuilt acl and ran the test suite. Initially I got 47 errors! According to

Re: [lfs-support] kmod-17

2014-04-21 Thread Pierre Labastie
Le 21/04/2014 19:01, TheOldFellow a écrit : Pierre Indeed this is where the problem lies. ls -l /usr/lib/liblzma.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 10 Apr 21 16:19 /usr/lib/liblzma.so - ../../lib/ However the real problem is in the last line of the xz installation, as you rightly say, because:

Re: [lfs-support] ACL check errors: are they important?

2014-04-21 Thread Hazel Russman
On Mon, 21 Apr 2014 19:25:10 +0200 Pierre Labastie pierre.labas...@neuf.fr wrote: Looking more closely at your log, it seems that acl's are enabled, because the line beginning with [95]: 'getfacl --omit-header f' correctly returns acl entries: user::rw- user:bin:rw- user:daemon:r--

Re: [lfs-support] ACL check errors: are they important?

2014-04-21 Thread Ken Moffat
On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 06:36:19PM +0100, Hazel Russman wrote: On Mon, 21 Apr 2014 19:25:10 +0200 Pierre Labastie pierre.labas...@neuf.fr wrote: Looking more closely at your log, it seems that acl's are enabled, because the line beginning with [95]: 'getfacl --omit-header f' correctly