On Fri, 2014-04-25 at 14:23 +0100, Jorge Almeida wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 12:56 PM, Simon Geard wrote:
>
> >
> > There's no information on the site, no source code, mailing lists - just
> > a couple of paragraphs grumbling about dbus, and a claim that it'
On Thu, 2014-04-24 at 20:16 +0100, Jorge Almeida wrote:
> Ok. I know about skabus, but it's not clear whether it will be able to
> function as drop-in replacement for dbus. I would love to get rid of
> dbus completelly.
There's no information on the site, no source code, mailing lists - just
a cou
On Wed, 2014-04-23 at 14:47 +0100, Jorge Almeida wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 10:26 AM, TheOldFellow wrote:
> >
> > I'm also avoiding d-bus and sysklogd as I have better alternatives.
> >
> Richard,
>
> Would you elaborate on alternatives to dbus?
There are none - if something needs dbus, it
On Sun, 2014-03-30 at 18:14 -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Ken Moffat wrote:
> > /usr : A separate /usr is a very old idea. Useful if you are on a
> > network where /usr is an nfs mount shared by several machines. I'm
> > sure there are other use cases, but I can't think of any at the
> > moment. F
On Sun, 2014-03-23 at 12:07 -0400, baho utot wrote:
> I think there are not many folks that have that on a separate partition.
>
> That's really the only problem with using /var/run.
>
> If I had to count using my fingers how many systems I have worked on
> that have /var mounted on a separate p
On Sat, 2014-03-22 at 09:59 -0400, baho utot wrote:
> I am working on RPM-LFS-7.5 which is LFS with the rpm package manager.
>
> I would like to adhere to Filesystem Hierarchy Standard 2.3 so my linux
> systems file system layout matches/closely matches my FreeBSD systems.
> When was the /run d
On Fri, 2014-03-14 at 13:48 -0400, wayne mcdanolds wrote:
>I am planning on compiling linux from scratch when I get around to
> it. I have downloaded LFS 6.3 version as well as a pdf for ver 6.3.
Why 6.3? That was released about 4-5 years ago, so it's *very* out of
date now...
Simon.
--
ht
On Fri, 2014-02-14 at 21:03 +0530, Oshadha Gunawardena wrote:
> /bin/sh -> /bin/dash
> ./v_check.sh: line 8: bison: command not found
> yacc not found
> ./v_check.sh: line 17: gawk: command not found
> /usr/bin/awk -> /usr/bin/mawk
> ./v_check.sh: line 34: makeinfo: command not found
Sigh...
Go
On Mon, 2013-12-30 at 23:29 +0100, Frans de Boer wrote:
> Dear reader,
>
> While building things again, I now start to wonder why LFS let almost
> every package installs a static library? Where are the static libraries
> used?
Short version, because it's easier to let them install a static libr
On Tue, 2013-12-31 at 01:41 +, Ken Moffat wrote:
> I think many LFS/BLFS builders don't care about these sort of
> problems. It was a tedious buisness to disable static libs in BLFS.
Yeah... I pass --disable-static to all BLFS packages as a matter of
scripting, even if not all respect it. Bu
On Wed, 2013-12-18 at 16:00 -0600, Dan McGhee wrote:
> You're right about the GPT without UEFI. But, AFIK, the user must *make*
> the partition behave with the GUID's. But, again AFIK, if the firmware
> is MBR based, you're still limited to four primaries.
No, because under GPT, there's simply n
On Wed, 2013-12-04 at 20:33 -0600, Dan McGhee wrote:
> Mentioning the obvious always helps--the old "forest and trees." In this
> case, however, even with that particular
> option doesn't seem to be present. But, I discovered much to my
> embarassment that CONFIG_SMP was not set. Rats.
Yeah, I
On Sat, 2013-11-30 at 23:47 +1300, Simon Geard wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-11-29 at 19:49 -0500, Baho Utot wrote:
> > The following packages are the only ones I have found ( in Chapter 5 )
> > that either puts something into or requires /lib64
> >
> > binutils-pass-1
On Fri, 2013-11-29 at 19:49 -0500, Baho Utot wrote:
> The following packages are the only ones I have found ( in Chapter 5 )
> that either puts something into or requires /lib64
>
> binutils-pass-1
> gcc-pass-1
> libstdc++
> binutils-pass-2
> gcc-pass-2
By /lib64, you mean /tool/lib64, given we'
On Fri, 2013-11-29 at 12:06 -0500, Baho Utot wrote:
> Is it possible to build LFS-7.4 on x86_64 without the /lib64 symlink?
It's possible, but requires a few small patches to glibc and gcc. At the
time I tried it, I based my changes on stuff from Cross-LFS, though
basically, they amounted to searc
On Thu, 2013-11-28 at 10:28 +, akhiezer wrote:
> You're expending resources to try to persuade people that there's no issue
> here.
I'm not trying to persuade anyone anything... I'm trying to understand
why this is considered such an important thing, why it comes up again
and again as a sourc
On Tue, 2013-11-26 at 11:03 -0600, Dan McGhee wrote:
> On the other hand, I can understand another possible difference unless
> I don't understand what "hot-plug" means. To me it's the ability to
> "plug something in" while the computer is running and have it
> work--much like a USB device. If m
On Tue, 2013-11-26 at 13:27 -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> The wording in this message comes across a little too strong. Yes, we
> sometimes get a little emotional about the foolishness that we see, but
> lets try to be a little more civil when discussing technical matters.
>
That's kind of what
On Tue, 2013-11-26 at 19:24 +, akhiezer wrote:
> that particular machine; or what? It's an intriguing concept - *never*
> needing
> to know the name of network device(s) on one's Linux computer, and for
> someone
> like yourself who would appear to be an (>=)advanced user.
Like I said... "
On Mon, 2013-11-25 at 23:09 -0500, Alan Feuerbacher wrote:
> Now that I've got my linux-3.12 system up and running, and the ethernet
> card running, I'm running into another problem:
>
> The mouse is not detected.
>
> The mouse (an older Microsoft Intellimouse USB model) works fine with
> the m
On Mon, 2013-11-25 at 20:12 -0500, Alan Feuerbacher wrote:
> On 11/25/2013 11:04 AM, William Harrington wrote:
> > Your link name is p4p1.
>
> How does this name, given by Fedora, relate to the "enp3s0" that my
> kernel assigned (see my earlier reply to Fernando).
Looks like Fedora uses a differ
On Mon, 2013-11-25 at 20:18 -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> I know the answer to that one. To ensure that really big iron with many
> ethernet devices will not have ethx assigned in random order due to race
> conditions. It probably comes up more frequently when using systemd
> which launches proc
On Thu, 2013-10-31 at 20:02 +, Ken Moffat wrote:
> There used to be some packages that gave problems if building in
> chroot. But I don't remember what they were.
Basically, anything that cares about the running kernel, such as
third-party driver packages - they usually try to find the sourc
On Sat, 2013-08-24 at 12:28 -0400, Dave wrote:
> When compiling and testing Glibc >
> I've noticed in the configure line the option
> '--enable-kernel=2.6.32'. Why this when its a 3.10.9 kernel?
Short version, because it has to work with the kernel you're running
during the build, not just the
On Thu, 2013-05-16 at 09:03 +0200, Stefan & Rebekka Wetter wrote:
> Hi,
>
> in the lfs-book you need some patches. I wonder, why these patches are
> needed? Are the upstream-sources not able to be compiled without?
Depends on the patch. Some are upstream fixes not yet in an upstream
release. Oth
On Fri, 2013-04-19 at 17:54 +0100, Ken Moffat wrote:
> LFS doesn't use it. BLFS depends on who edited the page, and when.
> We used not to use it, but then some of us were persuaded that it
> would be in the new standard. Me, I like it, others don't. Your
> system, your rules.
My personal incl
On Thu, 2013-04-18 at 23:49 -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> One thing to note is that there are several of these programs created
> and used by udev that are in /lib/udev, not the /usr hierarchy at all.
That's a product of the whole "separate /usr" argument, isn't it?
Simon.
--
http://linuxfromsc
On Wed, 2013-04-10 at 22:26 +0200, Dr.-Ing. Edgar Alwers wrote:
> I tryed to produce a rescue-disk sticker with GPT partition tables. I was not
> able to do it, following the article
>
> http://www.linux-archive.org/gentoo-user/481167-mounting-root-partition-uuide-
> no-initrd-needed.html
>
> Sa
On Sat, 2013-03-23 at 14:07 +0530, Mohamad Audhil wrote:
> I wrongly entered "root:x:0:0:root:/root:/bin/bash " instead of
> "root:x:0:0:root:/root:/bin/bash" inside /etc/passwd of my LFS, that
> single space made all this problem.
Ah, yes... that will do it. And very hard to spot, too - looki
On Mon, 2013-03-11 at 02:27 +, Ken Moffat wrote:
> So, have you changed something between completing chapter 6 and
> building the kernel ? The error implies that you cannot compile
> *any* normal C program.
Such as removing /tools after chapter 6 was complete? If gcc was
accidentally linked
On Wed, 2013-03-06 at 00:53 +0100, Frans de Boer wrote:
> Hi, I had the same issue, albeit with other scripts. The solution was to
> put 'set +h' into the scripts. It seems it's not always enough to have
> it set when entering the chroot environment.
>
> If you type things by hand, there is enou
On Wed, 2013-02-27 at 22:45 +0100, Frans de Boer wrote:
> By the way, I looked at the CLFS site and see that things are not that
> different only that they are a couple of versions behind. That said, I
> think I will try sometime their ideas and incorporated it with the
> running LFS.
Yeah, if
On Wed, 2013-01-23 at 13:10 -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> -march overrides -mtune. The later is only used if there is no
> appropriate -march setting (rarely).
Not quite - according to the gcc man page, -march implies -mtune,
meaning that if you don't specific the latter, it'll default to the
form
On Wed, 2013-01-09 at 15:40 -0800, Richard Hamilton wrote:
> I'm thinking about building a new LFS system based on the development.
> How often are the development updated?
>
Have a look at the Changelog page for an idea of what changes, and how
often...
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view
On Mon, 2013-01-07 at 19:18 -0500, Baho Utot wrote:
> I am trying to put LFS on a thumbdrive to use a rescue/fixit system.
>
> When I boot it can not find the usb drive and filesystem. I have the
> correct filesystem built into the kernel, not as a module
>
> I am miising something in my kernel
On Sun, 2013-01-06 at 09:06 -0500, Roy Birk wrote:
> And I might have been better off copying and pasting. It's difficult to
> tell the difference, in the book, between the number one and the letter
> L (lower case). I checked man pages and went with whichever seemed more
> sensible, but got it wro
On Sun, 2013-01-06 at 14:56 -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> binutils is critical. I wouldn't want to try to use a system with these
> errors. I suggest starting over.
That, and after installing binutils next time, check for the existence
of /tools/tools thing, make sure you've not made the same mis
On Sun, 2013-01-06 at 12:35 +0100, Tobias Gasser wrote:
> > AWK=`readlink -f /usr/bin/awk`
> > awk=/usr/bin/awk
> > [ "$AWK" == "/usr/bin/gawk" ] || die "$awk is not a symlink to gawk"
>
> some distros started to drop the /usr hierarchy
>
> the script should be a little smarter to accept the fil
On Sun, 2013-01-06 at 12:35 +0100, Tobias Gasser wrote:
> > AWK=`readlink -f /usr/bin/awk`
> > awk=/usr/bin/awk
> > [ "$AWK" == "/usr/bin/gawk" ] || die "$awk is not a symlink to gawk"
>
> some distros started to drop the /usr hierarchy
Out of curiosity, which ones? The only one I know that's me
On Sat, 2013-01-05 at 22:09 -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Here is another version. I can't say I really like it. The original is
> 40 lines and this is 73. All this because users either don't have
> enough experience to understand what's there now or because a user
> (generally experienced) jus
On Sat, 2013-01-05 at 11:39 -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> The idea of the script was that it should be short. Generally the
> problem is that the symlinks are not set and occasionally makeinfo is
> not installed. Rarely is the problem an out-of-date executable.
My issue with the script isn't whe
On Fri, 2013-01-04 at 19:11 -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> matthew gruda wrote:
> > the output of the version check script is:
> >
> > bash, version 4.2.24(1)-release
> > /bin/sh -> /bin/dash
>
> Fix this.
Bruce (and others), I think some improvement needs to be made to the
Requirements page in the
On Sat, 2012-12-29 at 19:37 +0800, xinglp wrote:
> "make -j2" error:
> help2man: can't get '--help' info from man/df.td/df
> make[2]: *** [man/df.1] Error 127
> make[2]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs
>
> "make -j1" works fine.
Yeah, I wouldn't have noticed that - as commented in other threa
On Fri, 2012-12-28 at 16:20 +0100, Tobias Gasser wrote:
> version 8.20 is available since oct 23.
> lfs-book has a ticket for it: 3215
>
> searching the lists just show the ticket, but no further comments so far.
>
> the ticket says 'no announce yet', here it is:
>
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive
On Sat, 2012-12-22 at 00:31 +, Richard Melville wrote:
> It seems a little churlish to pick holes in what is essentially a good
> article, and, indeed, one that supplied the answer to a question on
> this list.
True. Well, suffice it to say that the /dev/disks symlink tree *does*
support GPT
On Thu, 2012-12-20 at 14:53 +, Richard Melville wrote:
> I think that was understood; when they said that it was "stupid" it
> was surely meant that there could be some confusion in the use of
> similar terms.
Possibly, though if they'd understood it, you'd think they'd have
mentioned the by
On Tue, 2012-12-18 at 11:19 +, Richard Melville wrote
>
> Would't using GPT instead of MBR be a viable alternative?
Nope. GPT assigns UUIDs to the partitions, but that's all - the kernel
still deals only with traditional device names (sda1, sda2, etc). The
initramfs is still needed t
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.linu
On Sun, 2012-12-16 at 13:36 +0100, Jean-Philippe MENGUAL wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Yes, the book explains that for any major update of toolchain, all the
> system should be rebuilt. However, I would like your opinion for those
> who use lfs everyday.
>
> My plan is as follows: building lfs on sda1, then b
On Sun, 2012-12-16 at 13:19 -0800, JIA Pei wrote:
>
> Hi, Michael:
>
>
> Thank you very much for your detailed reply, so clear !!
> My Host System Requirements gives me the following result:
Note - that script isn't something you just run. It's something you have
to actually read the output of,
On Sun, 2012-12-16 at 14:46 +, Michael E. Maher wrote:
> Hi Pei,
>
> The '--enable-kernel' parameter specifies the minimum version of the
> Linux kernel required to run the resulting glibc.
And to elaborate - the minimum kernel version you need to support isn't
the one you're installing, it's
On Fri, 2012-12-14 at 21:32 -0500, Alexander Spitzer wrote:
> I'm assuming it doesn't work from the inside (i.e. chroot command
> gives an error) because it can't get to the interpreter requested:
> "/lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2"
Yes, that'd be correct. That path *will* exist a little later (once y
On Fri, 2012-12-14 at 22:26 -0500, Alexander Spitzer wrote:
> I did find another clue: when running "make" for the bash package I
> ran into a "Permission denied" error for yacc and I somehow sudoed my
> way around it. Perhaps this resulted in the wrong libraries being
> linked because I was not t
On Fri, 2012-12-14 at 19:22 -0500, Alexander Spitzer wrote:
> Hello all,
>
>
> I am on section 6.4, entering the chroot environment, in LFS Book 7.2
> and when i attempt to chroot I get the following error:
> /tools/bin/env: /tools/bin/bash: No such file or directory
"No such file or directory"
On Sun, 2012-12-02 at 21:14 +1300, Simon Geard wrote:
> And just to confirm, that was it. Not a problem with the linker like I'd
> assumed - just a missed step in the ncurses build. Seeing as it was
> complaining about libncurses (rather than libcurses) not being found, it
> nev
On Sun, 2012-12-02 at 15:01 +1300, Simon Geard wrote:
> I think Ken has pointed me in the right direction - bash links not to
> libncurses or libncursesw, but to plain-old libcurses, and I seem to
> have missed the commands that create the linker script that redirects
> that one. I&#
On Sat, 2012-12-01 at 07:27 -0600, William Harrington wrote:
>
> On Nov 30, 2012, at 5:37 AM, Simon Geard wrote:
>
> > /bin/bash: error while loading shared libraries: libncurses.so.5:
> > cannot
> > open shared object file: No such file or directory
>
> Do y
On Sat, 2012-12-01 at 16:19 +0100, Aleksandar Kuktin wrote:
> Can you do `ldd /bin/bash'?
Oddly, no. I can't use ldd because that's a shell script depending
on /bin/sh working, but if I run:
/lib/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 --list /bin/bash
...I get:
/bin/bash: error while loading shared libraries:
On Fri, 2012-11-30 at 11:17 -0500, Chris Staub wrote:
> First, check how Bash is linked: "readelf -l /bin/bash | grep
> interpret". Of course, this should say that it's looking for the dynamic
> linker in /lib. Then verify you actually have all the right libraries
> for Ncurses: "ls -la {/usr,}/
Hey guys...
Rewriting my LFS build scripts, I'm getting an interesting linking error
with bash in chapter 6, and am hoping someone can point me in the right
direction for tracking down the cause.
Basically, bash builds correctly, but the resulting binary is bad, any
attempt to invoke it resulting
On Mon, 2012-11-26 at 19:51 -0800, Kyle Brennan wrote:
> Hi,
> I'm not sure that this is the right mailing list, but I'm going to throw
> this out there anyways.
>
> I've got a few questions about building LFS on a 64 bit host and how
> multilib works.
>
> 1. What exactly is multilib? (I've
On Fri, 2012-11-16 at 16:07 +0530, prashant dawar wrote:
> here is the output of the Result of version check.sh on ubuntu 12.04
...
> /bin/sh -> /bin/dash
There's your problem. Go back to the "Host System Requirement" page and
re-read it - the text, that is, not just the script. The first item on
On Tue, 2012-11-13 at 14:18 -0500, alex lupu wrote:
> 2. In general, if grub 0.97 could be used here, does it have limitations in
> other complicated configurations, present and in the foreseeable future?
If I remember correctly, grub1 can't be built on a 64-bit system. That
is, it can boot one ju
On Tue, 2012-11-13 at 10:47 -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> I believe that cgroups is primarily implemented in the kernel. My
> problem is that when is type 'mount' from the command line, I get many
> more cgroups than mounted file systems. That's an implementation detail
> that is an irritant and
On Mon, 2012-11-05 at 22:11 +, Feuerbacher, Alan wrote:
> Ok. So is swap not considered a filesystem by convention, or for some other
> reason?
As the name suggests, the most important attribute of a filesystem is
files. Whereas swap is a trick for using disk storage as if it were
extra (albe
On Mon, 2012-11-05 at 16:31 +, Feuerbacher, Alan wrote:
> Bruce wrote:
>
> > For an SSD drive, I suggest getting gptdisk (fdisk syntax) or gparted
> > (challenging syntax) and partitioning the drive as a gpt drive. The
> > first partition should be at sector 2048 or 1 MB. Make /boot 1 M, swa
On Mon, 2012-11-05 at 20:32 +, dennisjperk...@comcast.net wrote:
> Partitions and filesystems are not identical on Linux/Unix systems.
> You carve a drive up into partitions, and you are free to format each
> partition with whatever filesystem you want. Every other operating
> system I am awar
On Thu, 2012-06-07 at 01:09 +0200, Kristian Poul Herkild wrote:
> How on Earth does one manage to get that binary piece of junk to work?
> I've tried several approaches now, and after a few weeks with no luck
> getting first 12.2 and now 12.4 to work I'm about to give up.
>
> Has anybody managed
On Tue, 2012-05-15 at 19:43 +0300, Эмиль Кранц wrote:
> By trial and error I have found that any action that takes more than
> one SBU in LFS is better off with -j1.
>
> BLFS packages are more agreeable with -j2 switch.
>
> On my dual core machine only kernel compiles flawlessly with -j2
> switc
On Mon, 2012-05-07 at 21:50 +0430, Yasser Zamani wrote:
> 1. The mount command should not run if it's already mounted. how
> it can be verified before mounting, via Linux commands?
Assuming $LFS is set, either
mount | fgrep $LFS
or
fgrep $LFS /proc/mounts
Simon.
signature.as
On Mon, 2012-05-07 at 20:56 +0430, Yasser Zamani wrote:
> You're right Simon, Unicodes are two fold. And also I don't know if
> 'sed' can edit a binary stream :?
Not safely. Remember, it deals with lines of text - if a stream doesn't
consist of lines of text, the output may not be what you expect.
On Sun, 2012-05-06 at 21:02 +0430, Yasser Zamani wrote:
> Thanks a lot Simon,
>
> As I cited, the book is well described enough but I worried a bit when
> I saw a 'sed' script at first time. However, as the mailing list's
> friends advised, after learning a bit online, now I don't have any
> troub
On Sat, 2012-05-05 at 19:50 +0430, Yasser Zamani wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> At first thank you very much for this useful site and book!
>
> Currently I'm doing jobs step-by-step with no getting any errors;
> however, sometimes the steps are very specific e.g. GCC pass 2 steps.
> GCC needs that patch,
On Sat, 2012-05-05 at 17:19 +1200, Gordon Findlay wrote:
> In my perception the book currently assumes that the audience is
> people with some (considerable) understanding of the command-line, and
> OS concepts in general (for example the fact that 'source directory'
> might have different meanings
On Fri, 2012-05-04 at 10:34 -0700, Qrux wrote:
> Would it be hard to put an "unpack_warning" entity before each of the
> "Phase 1" builds (all 2 or 3), or even the "Phase 2" builds (those
> same 2 or 3)?
Hard? No. But would it be productive to do so? If the reader hasn't
understood the basic instr
On Fri, 2012-05-04 at 03:34 -0700, Scott Robertson wrote:
> Under section 2.3 the very first thing one does (other than version-check.sh
> in the Preface)
> is create the file system using the mke2fs command. Where does it say you
> need to be root for that?
> I'm just saying maybe not everyone
On Sun, 2012-03-25 at 08:16 -0500, mike wrote:
> hi,
>
> i get to configuring gmp i ran the following and this is what i get and am
> confused on how to fix. Any guidence wood be helpfull
>
> root:/sources/gmp-5.0.4# ABI=32 ./configure ...
>
> configure: WARNING: you should use --build, --host,
On Wed, 2012-03-21 at 21:54 +0200, Alexander Kapshuk wrote:
> (6). While still in $LFS/sources/gcc-build, I ran ln -sv ../usr/bin/cpp
> /lib; And this is where I found it confusing, ../usr/bin/cpp ==
> $LFS/sources/usr/bin/cpp; but /usr/bin/cpp isn't found in $LFS/sources.
> It's found is $LFS/u
On Tue, 2012-03-20 at 16:50 +0200, Alexander Kapshuk wrote:
> So in other words, 'ln -sv ../usr/bin/cpp /lib' and 'ln
> -sv /usr/bin/cpp /lib' are equivalent?
Not quite, and the difference can be seen when you look at the link
*outside* the chroot environment (i.e where the filesystem is mounted
t
On Tue, 2012-02-28 at 10:01 -0800, Kyle Brennan wrote:
> Aha, thanks for clearing that up. I assumed that those messages were
> bad because in my experience with Java, any messages of that sort
> meant there is some sort of a compile time error. I guess that shows
> how much of a Newbie I am.
On Fri, 2012-02-24 at 18:27 -0600, al...@verizon.net wrote:
> BTW, I didn't know that developers (udev and otherwise) are
> continuously careful to stay within the latest Glibc-thenKernel confines.
Udev is something of a special case - it's not just another program,
it's a program written specific
On Wed, 2012-02-01 at 20:47 +0530, mohit jain wrote:
> Hii Alain
> I am using LFS-6.7 version for building LFS and UBUNTU 10.04 LTS as
> the host.
> While compiling(issuing the make command after configure) gcc-pass1
> (which needs mpfr, gmp and mpc as its subpackages) it is showing an
> error "gmp
On Wed, 2012-02-01 at 09:26 +, Firerat wrote:
> On 1 February 2012 08:54, Dmitry Blum wrote:
> > X86
> > LFS 6.8
> > BLFS 6.3
> > X`s prefix - /usr
> /usr?
> or /usr/X11 ?
>
> you are better off having X in its own subdir and not 'mixed in' with
> the rest of /usr
Why do you say that? Unless
On Mon, 2012-01-30 at 22:47 -0500, rafe_b wrote:
> If I take Step 2 of Sec 5.3 literally, then the
> first 'tar' command of Sec. 5.5.1 doesn't make
> sense:
>
> tar -jxf ../mpfr-3.1.0.tar.bz2
>
> because it implies that the tarball sits in
> a directory just above where I'm sitting
> when the com
On Sun, 2012-01-29 at 22:46 -0500, Alain Toussaint wrote:
> For the moment, I'm looking at qemu but there's no
> instructions on the packages needed to run it.
It's been a while since I installed qemu, but from memory, it didn't
have many - nothing that wouldn't already be present on a typical
des
On Sun, 2012-01-29 at 10:00 -0800, Robert A. Lerche wrote:
> Hi. I have previously built LFS and used the LFS Live CD project to
> create a custom system (back in the 6.3 / 6.4 days).
>
> I am now engaged in a project for a client using Android on a custom
> embedded system. As you may know, And
On Sun, 2012-01-29 at 14:44 +0530, mohit jain wrote:
> Sir I have attached the text file of the problem faced. Please find it
> and provide a remedy.
> I am using LFS-BOOK-6.7.pdf
> With UBUNTU 10.04 LTS as the host
> Facing problem in compiling GCC-4.5.1 - Pass 1 package
> and the error faced is
On Fri, 2012-01-20 at 15:23 -0500, cara...@cox.net wrote:
> Wish me luck or insanity!
> Elly
I wish you luck, but expect insanity... :)
Simon.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfro
On Sun, 2012-01-15 at 16:03 -0800, Li, David wrote:
> I am new to LFS and am very interested in using a virtual machine (e.g
> virtual box vm). Is this something documented in the book already.
> Does this mean it's doable?
As far as building LFS is concerned, a VM is no different to any other
sys
On Thu, 2012-01-12 at 01:50 +, Andrew Benton wrote:
> That reminds me of http://xkcd.com/349/
>
> Andy
Yes, that comic should sound familiar to all LFS users... :)
Simon.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs
On Tue, 2012-01-10 at 10:11 -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Simon Geard wrote:
> > On Mon, 2012-01-09 at 08:57 -0700, jasonps...@jegas.com wrote:
> >> Now, I wouldn't care that much except even running on a DEDICATED 32bit
> >> Linux (Slackware 13.37) with MAKEFLA
On Tue, 2012-01-10 at 02:20 -0700, jasonps...@jegas.com wrote:
> Well, I opend the "previous untouchable" RC file and tossed readline all
> over it ... and when I booted .. GUESS WHAT? I was able to step through
> the actual boot process one command at a time... and I saw the offending
> error for
On Mon, 2012-01-09 at 08:57 -0700, jasonps...@jegas.com wrote:
> Now, I wouldn't care that much except even running on a DEDICATED 32bit
> Linux (Slackware 13.37) with MAKEFLAGS set to EIGHT to use all CORES...
> it takes a while... So running the procedure twice is time
> consuming.. We're talkin
On Mon, 2012-01-09 at 04:19 -0700, jasonps...@jegas.com wrote:
> But my REAL puzzle is the PERL thing I'm addressing here happens pretty
> early in the big picture, and AFTER a very global chown -R lfs /tools
> and chown -R lfs /sources
If copying a file to /tools/bin gives permission errors when
On Sun, 2012-01-08 at 18:03 -0700, jasonps...@jegas.com wrote:
> I'm doing a few things there - but I do set up that sim link - but I
> don't quite understand it
> because for what you describe, my small mind thinks it should be written
>
>
> ln -s $LFS/tools /tools
>
> But I'm sure its me jus
On Mon, 2012-01-02 at 08:42 -0800, brown wrap wrote:
> Actually, I answered my own question, I changed fstab to hda and that
> allowed it to boot. I don't quite understand it, since I thought hda
> was for scsi and this is an ols laptop which uses IDE.
Other way around. Traditionally, 'hd' was fo
On Wed, 2011-12-28 at 05:53 -0500, Dave H wrote:
> hi, i am at Chapter 5.4 of the lfs manual v7.0 and i'm confused where
> it says to make the binutils-build directory.
>
>
>
> i am assuming at this step, i should be user lfs and currently in the
> $LFS/sources directory.
No. Remember, *every*
On Thu, 2011-11-03 at 15:37 +, Ken Moffat wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 02, 2011 at 02:09:20AM +, Ken Moffat wrote:
> > Thanks, that is working, both for 3.0.4 and for 2.6.32.43.
> > Interestingly, udev claims to start on both kernels. I'll see if I
> > agree after I've tried to use an external us
On Wed, 2011-10-19 at 17:31 -0700, Don Burns wrote:
> I went back and redid everything from scratch for a fourth time (I'm
> getting good at this),
Don't worry... that's not at all unusual. I'd be surprised if there were
many people who managed to go through the entire book on their first
attempt,
On Wed, 2011-08-24 at 14:40 -0600, Joseph Villa wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've found that I'm having problems with Perl after doing the chroot
> command in the beginning of Chapter 6. Perl doesn't run, and acts as
> if the executable where perl lives at, isn't there.
>
> I've checked my links to perl when
1 - 100 of 363 matches
Mail list logo
