[lfs-support] gcc 4.8.2 gcc didn't build
I used the LFS instructions to build gcc 4.8.2 on a project outside of LFS. The only language I removed on the config line was the 'go' language. But it did not build a gcc. Here is what was built: -rwxr-xr-x 2 root sfcb 2.1M Feb 21 14:20 x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu-gfortran -rwxr-xr-x 2 root sfcb 2.1M Feb 21 14:20 x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu-gcj -rwxr-xr-x 4 root sfcb 2.1M Feb 21 14:20 x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu-g++ -rwxr-xr-x 4 root sfcb 2.1M Feb 21 14:20 x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu-c++ -rwxr-xr-x 1 root sfcb 1.4M Feb 21 14:20 jcf-dump -rwxr-xr-x 2 root sfcb 2.1M Feb 21 14:20 gfortran -rwxr-xr-x 2 root sfcb 2.1M Feb 21 14:20 gcj -rwxr-xr-x 4 root sfcb 2.1M Feb 21 14:20 g++ -rwxr-xr-x 4 root sfcb 2.1M Feb 21 14:20 c++ -rwxr-xr-x 1 root sfcb 1.2M Feb 21 14:20 gcov -rwxr-xr-x 1 root sfcb 2.1M Feb 21 14:20 cpp -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [blfs-support] In which package is xorg macros?
That is what I guess, but after installing the latest version of util macros, I am still getting an error that says I need version 1.8 of xorg macros. At least that is what I recall seeing, I am not in from of the machine currently. From: Chris Staub To: brown wrap ; BLFS Support List Sent: Tuesday, November 6, 2012 8:26 AM Subject: Re: [blfs-support] In which package is xorg macros? On 11/06/2012 10:15 AM, brown wrap wrote: > I finished LFS in December of last year, and then started the X11 > install in January. I got side tracked on other project and now would > like to finish the X11 installation. Last night in trying to proceed, I > got an error that said I needed a later version of xorg macros. In what > package do I find the xorg macros? Thanks. > > I assume it's probably "util-macros".-- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [lfs-support] Cannot open root device "sda1"
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. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: [lfs-support] Cannot open root device "sda1"
>Maybe it's called sdb1 or hda1 or perhaps you compiled your kernel with >modules? I considered hba1, but never changed it since when I boot into Fedora, I always mounted it as /dev/sda1. Anyway that got me beyond that panic, but now its complaining about fs ext3. At this point should my fstab be using /dev/hda instead of /dev/sda I set up? Or is it complaining about not recognizing the filesystem type of ext3? Thank you. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
[lfs-support] Cannot open root device "sda1"
I am using LFS 7.0. I have completed everything just trying to boot the system. When I do boot,it panics and I get: Cannot open root device "sda1" or unknown=block(2,0) ... hda1 hda2 hda3 hda4 My grub.cfg looks just like the one in the book. On the same machine, I booted into Fedora, which was using a 2.6 kernel and used lspci to see which drivers I needed, and included those. I did build the grub cd so I can boot from that and try different approaches. I am trying to figure out if I am missing a driver, or I have grub.cfg misconfigured. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Just starting 7.0
You need to learn to read English. gcc-4.6.2-startfiles_fix-1.patch is ^ never mentioned in LFS7. It says to use http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/patches/lfs/7.0/gcc-4.6.1-startfiles_fix-1.patch ^ You are mixing the 7.0 and development versions of the book. -- Bruce I don't appreciate your condescending reply. What I did what download the 7.0 version of the manual. I printed that out. I also have been using the "Read online" documentation. I used the wget-list from the online documentation to download all of the software. I used the wget with the wget-list to download all of the software and the patches. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Just starting 7.0
From: Bruce Dubbs To: brown wrap ; LFS Support List Sent: Monday, November 7, 2011 8:41 PM Subject: Re: Just starting 7.0 brown wrap wrote: > > > I am just starting the build of 7.0. The last time I posted was back > in version 6.5. Anyway, I have a question about the patching of gcc. > The directions in the book showing patching 4.6.1. The patch now is > 4.6.2. I tried to apply the patch, substituting the new patch and was > prompted, as to what file to patch. Is the below line the correct > format to patch gcc from the binutils-build directory? Thanks. > > patch -Np1 -i ../gcc-4.6.2-cross_compile-1.patch If you are using LFS-7.0, use the packages and patches that it references: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/stable/chapter03/patches.html Also, read section 3.1. It tells you how to check if you have all the right packages. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page I read the section 3.1 and successfully patched glibc, then I tried patching gcc and ran into the same sort of problem. See below: fs:~/gcc-build$ patch -Np1 -i ../gcc-4.6.2-startfiles_fix-1.patch can't find file to patch at input line 22 Perhaps you used the wrong -p or --strip option? The text leading up to this was: -- |Submitted By: Jeremy Huntwork (jhuntwork AT linuxfromscratch DOT org) |Date: 2008-12-05 |Initial Package Version: 4.3.2 |Upstream Status: See below. |Origin: DIY Linux, See below. |Description: Original patch follows: | |# DIY Linux Patch |Date: 2008-09-09 |Author: Refer Origin. |Origin: Partial revert of http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2006-11/msg00416.html |Maker: Greg Schafer |Upstream Status: Not applicable. Tweak only for Temptools phase GCC-Pass2. |Description: Partially revert GCC driver to pre-GCC-4.3 state to allow startfiles to be | found in $prefix when GCC is configured for a non-standard prefix eg: /temptools. Full | background info in thread starting here: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2008-03/msg00095.html | and GCC bugzilla here: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35532 | |diff -Naur gcc-4.3.0-RC-20080222.orig/gcc/gcc.c gcc-4.3.0-RC-20080222/gcc/gcc.c |--- gcc-4.3.0-RC-20080222.orig/gcc/gcc.c 2008-01-24 18:57:12.0 + |+++ gcc-4.3.0-RC-20080222/gcc/gcc.c 2008-03-02 06:07:36.0 + -- File to patch: -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Just starting 7.0
I am just starting the build of 7.0. The last time I posted was back in version 6.5. Anyway, I have a question about the patching of gcc. The directions in the book showing patching 4.6.1. The patch now is 4.6.2. I tried to apply the patch, substituting the new patch and was prompted, as to what file to patch. Is the below line the correct format to patch gcc from the binutils-build directory? Thanks. patch -Np1 -i ../gcc-4.6.2-cross_compile-1.patch -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: LFS 6.6 X86_64
Well, I have an Acer M5641. Fedora wouldn't boot, but CentOS would. LFS DVD worked as well. Solaris didn't see the disks either. At one point I even tried a different SATA controller. I can't really off any help, but I've had many similar problems. Although like I said, LFS dvd worked. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Problems with HAL
I built HAL, and during the compile received some errors that appeared to be related to the building of the documentation, so I didn't worry about it. I installed it, along with the startup script and thought things were ok. Now I find its not running. The only way to start it is to specify daemon=no. I have searched around and didn't see anyone experiencing problems with HAL. There are no errors in the sys.log, it just won't remain running. Has anyone else experienced this? -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Problems with HAL
I built HAL, and during the compile received some errors that appeared to be related to the building of the documentation, so I didn't worry about it. I installed it, along with the startup script and thought things were ok. Now I find its not running. The only way to start it is to specify daemon=no. I have searched around and didn't see anyone experiencing problems with HAL. There are no errors in the sys.log, it just won't remain running. Has anyone else experienced this? -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Which chipset for USB?
> > Great! Good work! > > Mike Many thanks to LinuxFan, he is the one who discovered the fix. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Which chipset for USB?
> Someone said boot parameter irqpoll is the key. > http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=81153&highlight=noapic+usb OK ! That fixed the old keyboard. I can now at least log in from that. The USB ports don't work still, but at least I can now log into the console. Thank you. since I don't have KDE working yet, I don't know if the mouse works. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: my lsmod versus LFS DVD lsmod
> For example, I have no idea what > ohci1394 is. > > Firewire. If you don't know that you need it, you > probably don't. OK, thanks. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: my lsmod versus LFS DVD lsmod
> You are leaving out many necessary things. I'm no kernel > expert, > but how can you hope to boot without any disc drivers or > file > systems present? > > I think your problem goes much deeper than just a mouse not > working. > I'm surprised you aren't panicking with root file system > not found. > > Mike The system boots, I can log into it remotely, it mounts my disks, I just can't use any keyboard or mouse. The filesystems and such are not modules, they are just included in the kernel. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
my lsmod versus LFS DVD lsmod
my kernel loads two modules: ohci_hcd 19241 0 ehci_hcd 30605 0 lsmod of LFS 6.3: Module Size Used by usbhid 32704 0 ext3 118664 2 jbd69360 1 ext3 psmouse46620 0 pcspkr 4864 0 ext2 56584 1 isofs 39780 1 zlib_inflate 17024 1 isofs sg 37800 0 sr_mod 19492 1 cdrom 42152 1 sr_mod sd_mod 29568 3 ohci1394 39240 0 ahci 27140 3 ohci_hcd 25220 0 ehci_hcd 37004 0 sata_sil24 18052 0 libata141456 2 ahci,sata_sil24 ieee1394 109912 1 ohci1394 usbcore 153776 4 usbhid,ohci_hcd,ehci_hcd amd74xx17584 0 [permanent] ide_core 160784 1 amd74xx My problem is I don't know how to make the one-to-one correspondence in building a kernel. For example, I have no idea what ohci1394 is. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Which chipset for USB?
> > Your best bet, I think, is to use lsmod with CentOS > running, and see > what's loaded, and configure appropriately. > I used lsmod on the running CentOS and it must have had nearly 100 modules. > Anyway, you might try replacing the USB mouse with a > regular one, > either PS/2 or serial port, and see if you can use the > machine that > way, until you resolve whatever the problem is. I tried that. NO inputs work. Not USB or PS/2 mouse and old XT keyboard. Today I booted up the LFS 6.3 DVD and its works as well. I found its .config and tried to use it to build a kernal: make mrproper Copied it to .config make oldconfig make make modules_install and then copied everything to its place in the /boot directory. I had previuously done the same thing with the CentOS .config. Both end up in a 'panic'. So now I went back to building a clean kernel that will at least boot again. So to state it again, none of the inputs work after I make the kernel selection from the menu. The last time I made this selection I was not using the USB, I was using XT and PS/2 mouse. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
RE: Which chipset for USB?
From: Gastón Cadenasso Subject: RE: Which chipset for USB? To: lfs-support@linuxfromscratch.org Date: Sunday, March 21, 2010, 10:02 AM Sorry about my english! I have tested a lot of VIA chipsets on PCI Boards and always works fine, but i don't know about NEC Well, I went down to the local Staples and purchased a USB board. The board has NEC chips. I got rid of the errors I had been seeing with IRQs, but still no USB. BTW, as a reminder, none of my input devices work. Not even a PS/2 mouse an a serial keyboard. In even for a solution, I discovered someone who had a problem with Knoppix. IT reminded me this machine acts the same way under Knoppix, but as stated before, runs fine under CentOS. I tried using the CentOS config yesterday and it doesn't even boot up. Get a panic, so I won't persue that route. I'd be happy to get any keyboard and mouse to work. Here is a link to the Knoppix problem, where none of the input devices work: I used a Knoppix dvd that arrived with the Linux Magazine a while back. I started looking into this again because I want to bring up KDE. http://www.knoppix.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=30497 -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Which chipset for USB?
Well, I have tried dozens of configurations to try and get my USB ports to work and nothing has succeeded. There is a config that works, because my USB ports work on CentOS, but I am tired of fighting the issue. I simply want a recommendation on a chipset or PCI board that works under LFS. --- On Sun, 3/21/10, Andrew Benton wrote: > From: Andrew Benton > Subject: Re: Which chipset for USB? > To: lfs-support@linuxfromscratch.org > Date: Sunday, March 21, 2010, 9:49 AM > On 21/03/10 15:14, brown wrap wrote: > > > > > > I have given up on the NVidia chipset and trying to > get a kernel built that supports USB. I am now going to buy > a PCI board, but don't want to go through this hassel again. > I notice NEC and VIA chipsets on PCI boards. Which is more > widelt supported? Thank you. > > > Linux runs on anything. There is very little hardware that > is not supported. Clearly it > supports the hardware you have at the moment because your > host system runs on it. > > Andy > -- > 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
Which chipset for USB?
I have given up on the NVidia chipset and trying to get a kernel built that supports USB. I am now going to buy a PCI board, but don't want to go through this hassel again. I notice NEC and VIA chipsets on PCI boards. Which is more widelt supported? Thank you. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Since we are talking USB
> Get a copy of the kernel that Centos uses and rebuild that > with the > Centos configuration. > > Alternatively, copy the Centos kernel to your LFS > system. You'll also > need to copy the entire /lib/modules/ > tree. > > -- Bruce What I did was get a copy of the CentOS config file, moved it over to the LFS system and then rebuilt the kernel. I thought I had tried that before, but didn't remember the result, other than the fact it wouldn't boot. What happens is I get: VFS: Cannot open root device "sda1" on unknown - block (0.) Please append a correct "root=" boot option, here are the available options: and then it panics. Now I don't know much about building kernels, so I followed the directions in the book, didn't vary at all. One thing I will point out is the CentOS system uses initrd. I don't know where that is defined, maybe that the reason for the panic. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Since we are talking USB
> I did some googling and there seem to be lots of reports of > problems > with Acer USB ports. > > -- Bruce I reposted the two files, but to revisit things, my USB ports work fine under Centos on the same machine, so I think its a matter of configuration. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Reposted sys.log
http://pastebin.com/EGZYEdMe -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Reposted my config
config file: http://pastebin.com/TVa6pvbx -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Since we are talking USB
Yes, I didn't see that that, but that's the name: -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2137391 Mar 16 16:12 System.map-2.6.32.7 --- On Tue, 3/16/10, Chris Staub wrote: > From: Chris Staub > Subject: Re: Since we are talking USB > To: "LFS Support List" > Date: Tuesday, March 16, 2010, 9:35 PM > On 03/16/2010 11:56 PM, brown wrap > wrote: > > I was never able to resolve my USB problem. Here is > the output of lspci -v: > > > > > > > > The system boots up, seems to recognize the USB ports, > but then gets errors in the sys.log: > > > > http://pastebin.com/eKZ5GycV > > > From sys.log... > > # > Inspecting /boot/System.map-2.6.32.7 > # > Mar 16 20:29:51 guajome-dome kernel: Cannot find map file. > > > The obvious question would be - is this what he .map file > is actually > named? What's the output of "ls /boot"? > -- > 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: Since we are talking USB
Bruce, I am not sure what you mean about the first two entries being incomplete. I just included the portion of lspci that pertained to USB. --- On Tue, 3/16/10, Bruce Dubbs wrote: > From: Bruce Dubbs > Subject: Re: Since we are talking USB > To: "LFS Support List" > Date: Tuesday, March 16, 2010, 9:15 PM > brown wrap wrote: > > I was never able to resolve my USB problem. Here is > the output of lspci -v: > > > > > > > > 00:04.0 USB Controller: nVidia Corporation GeForce > 7100/nForce 630i USB (rev a1) (prog-if 10 [OHCI]) > > Subsystem: Acer Incorporated [ALI] > Device 0137 > > Flags: bus master, 66MHz, fast > devsel, latency 0, IRQ 20 > > Memory at fea7f000 (32-bit, > non-prefetchable) [size=4K] > > Capabilities: [44] Power Management > version 2 > > Kernel driver in use: ohci_hcd > > Kernel modules: ohci-hcd > > > > 00:04.1 USB Controller: nVidia Corporation MCP73 > [nForce 630i] USB 2.0 Controller (EHCI) (rev a1) (prog-if 20 > [EHCI]) > > Subsystem: Acer Incorporated [ALI] > Device 0137 > > Flags: bus master, 66MHz, fast > devsel, latency 0, IRQ 23 > > Memory at fea7ec00 (32-bit, > non-prefetchable) [size=256] > > Capabilities: [44] Debug port: > BAR=1 offset=0098 > > Capabilities: [80] Power Management > version 2 > > Kernel driver in use: ehci_hcd > > Kernel modules: ehci-hcd > > > > The system boots up, seems to recognize the USB ports, > but then gets errors in the sys.log: > > > > http://pastebin.com/eKZ5GycV > > > > Here is my current config file: > > > > http://pastebin.com/03FY0zwc > > > > And finally here is the entire output of lspci: > > > > http://pastebin.com/GtT6iUqb > > > > Anyone see anything? > > The first two submissions are incomplete. > > -- Bruce > -- > 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
Since we are talking USB
I was never able to resolve my USB problem. Here is the output of lspci -v: 00:04.0 USB Controller: nVidia Corporation GeForce 7100/nForce 630i USB (rev a1) (prog-if 10 [OHCI]) Subsystem: Acer Incorporated [ALI] Device 0137 Flags: bus master, 66MHz, fast devsel, latency 0, IRQ 20 Memory at fea7f000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=4K] Capabilities: [44] Power Management version 2 Kernel driver in use: ohci_hcd Kernel modules: ohci-hcd 00:04.1 USB Controller: nVidia Corporation MCP73 [nForce 630i] USB 2.0 Controller (EHCI) (rev a1) (prog-if 20 [EHCI]) Subsystem: Acer Incorporated [ALI] Device 0137 Flags: bus master, 66MHz, fast devsel, latency 0, IRQ 23 Memory at fea7ec00 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=256] Capabilities: [44] Debug port: BAR=1 offset=0098 Capabilities: [80] Power Management version 2 Kernel driver in use: ehci_hcd Kernel modules: ehci-hcd The system boots up, seems to recognize the USB ports, but then gets errors in the sys.log: http://pastebin.com/eKZ5GycV Here is my current config file: http://pastebin.com/03FY0zwc And finally here is the entire output of lspci: http://pastebin.com/GtT6iUqb Anyone see anything? -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Is anyone using a PCI card for USB
I could never figure out how to get my USB ports to work. I tried numerous kernel configurations and none of them would fly. I just moved on to other things so I could proceed with LFS. Now I'm in BLFS and it would be nice to log in directly from the console, instead of ssh'ing in. Has anyone purchased a USB card that they installed and got to work? -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
BLFS xulrunner download
I'm a bit confused. I'm trying to install Firefox and it talks about dowbloading Xulrunner, yet the download point to the same location as the Firefox download. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Trying to compile Xorg Libs
> Then either you must still have another, older xproto > version somewhere, > or you - more likely - are reusing the same source > directories. Make > sure you've removed all source directories for the X > packages. I don't know where the compile script is getting its info from. I went through the compile log file and found numerous occurances of 'version not met', but then in using the pkg-config command, found the correct version already installed. I even did a search from '/' and only found xproto.pc in the correct place: root [ /usr/local/xc/lib ]# find / -name "xproto.pc" -print /usr/X11/lib/pkgconfig/xproto.pc /usr/local/xc/proto-first-try/done/xproto-7.0.10/xproto.pc /usr/local/xc/proto/xproto-7.0.16/xproto.pc /usr/local/xc/proto-3-4-2010/xproto-7.0.10/xproto.pc root [ /usr/local/xc/lib ]# I only found the versions I made, and the correct version that was installed. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Probably need to reinstall GCC
> Mike, I have done some research on this problem and its due
> to a package
> using a define that is not supposed to be used. To
> check if string.h is
> really the problem, you only need to do:
>
> cat > t.c << "EOF"
> #include
> int main(){}
> EOF
>
> gcc -o t t.c
>
> If that compiles, the problem is not string.h.
I would be interested in what you found. I am just wondering if I installed
something that overwrote something I didn't intend to. The only packages I have
ininstalled were the ones in LFS and packages from BLFS:
dhcpd
sshd
openldap
mysql
tripwire
bind
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Probably need to reinstall GCC
> cat > t.c << "EOF"
> #include
> int main(){}
> EOF
>
> gcc -o t t.c
>
> If that compiles, the problem is not string.h.
>
> -- Bruce
>
It compiles:
oot [ ~/test ]# cat > t.c << "EOF"
> #include
> int main(){}
> EOF
root [ ~/test ]#
root [ ~/test ]# gcc -o t t.c
root [ ~/test ]# ls -l
total 16
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 8893 Mar 1 12:13 t
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 33 Mar 1 12:13 t.c
root [ ~/test ]#
I had already restored gcc and glibc prior to this test. After that restore I
was able to compile again. Something must have been overwritten.
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Probably need to reinstall GCC
> The safe answer is "everything". More likely is "nothing", > so > long as you are rebuilding identically the same version of > gcc. > > More realistically, I'd try looking at string.h and find > out > what happened to it. Without forensic information, it's > difficult > to say how to proceed. What is the cause of death? > > Have you tried doing a diff of the file in /usr/include and > the > one which comes "fresh" out of the tarball? > > Mike I really don't know what happened, but Bruce Dubbs and I checked the size and MD5 of /usr/include/string.h and it was ok. At that point I figured something was seriously wrong and probably more than just that one file, so I decided to do a fresh install of glibc and gcc. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Probably need to reinstall GCC
> Incidentally, this points up the need for doing backups, > even on > an incompletely built system. > > Mike I remembered I moved all of the compiled programs to a separate directory. I was able to go back and do another "make install" on glibc and then gcc. I was then able to make net-tools, one of the packages I could not compile earlier. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Probably need to reinstall GCC
I have trouble compiling once I got into BLFS. I think I clobbered something during an install. Anything that tries to include: /usr/include/string.h won't compile. I figured out that file get installed from glibc, but gcc won't compile it. So I need to backup to a point in LFS where I can recompile gcc and then reinstalll glic. If I start at pass one and recompile gcc, what else should be remade? -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: A little more on Net-Tools
> Everything you needed is discussed in this thread. Simply > use the CVS > version on the Berlios server. No patches needed. Works > great. > > -- > Randy I downloaded Net-Tools from Berlios and it failed to compile as well. I ended up building BIN with net-tools. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
A little more on Net-Tools
I did download the Fedora patches and patched net-tools and was able to compile it on Fedora-12: g...@localhost ~]$ uname -ra Linux localhost.localdomain 2.6.31.12-174.2.22.fc12.i686.PAE #1 SMP Fri Feb 19 19:10:04 UTC 2010 i686 athlon i386 GNU/Linux [...@localhost ~]$ But I took that same patched directory, tarred it up, and moved it to my LFS/BLFS and it failed. I would like the net-tools, but as I stated earliar I was trying to compile them now to test BIND. I guess for now, I'll skip the test and just install BIND. I did search the archives for discussion on net-tools and didn't find any recent articles. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: How is the LiveCD different from actual Version 6.6-rc1 build?
> >> Is your keyboard direct connect, or through a hub? > The latter has > >> also been known to cause problems with several > versions of the kernel, > >> so I strongly suggest you not to use a hub with a > keyboard or mouse. > >> > >> Mike When you say hub, do you mean an external hub? No, I don't have an external hub. I have four usb inputs on the front and two on the back. I have tried both and neither work, nor does a PS/2 keyboard, so I think I did something wrong somewhere. If anyone can make more suggestions to try, I'm for it, but for now I am logging in remotely. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: No ext2 filesystem ?
> Is it possible to enable ext3 support without ext2? > Did you create the ext2 partition under Centos? Does it > have some sort of extended > attributes/selinux type modifications? I've had a similar > problem in the past with > a reiserfs partition that I created under Ubunut that I > couldn't mount under LFS. > > Andy Yes, I found the command to make that partition ext3 and that worked. I didn't know I had to build it into the kernel. I figured if ext3 came up, ext2 would. I still have not resolved my keyboard problem, but I guess I won't spend anymore time on it. I know there is a fix because the LFS Live cd works. Anyway, for now I brought it up and log into it remotely. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
No ext2 filesystem ?
-bash-4.1# mount /dev/sda1 on / type ext3 (rw) proc on /proc type proc (rw) sysfs on /sys type sysfs (rw) devpts on /dev/pts type devpts (rw,gid=4,mode=620) tmpfs on /dev/shm type tmpfs (rw) -bash-4.1# mount /dev/sda3 /home mount: unknown filesystem type 'ext2' -bash-4.1# I have a filesystem that won't mount under LFS. It mounts under Centos and contains all of my sources. When I try to mount it, I get unknown filesystem. I can mount the root filesystem which is ext3, but not this one: -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
I don't have input from either PS/2 or USB
I connected a PS/2 keyboard and couldn't input from that either. I know the keyboard works because while it was at the grub prompt I hit return and it continued. I guess I could live with this by logging in from another computer, but I'd like to resolve this. http://pastebin.com/d3ec0600c -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Booted up with nothing attached
I disconnected the keyboard and mouse and rebooted. I am not sure where to remove selinux, but I haven't recompiled the kernel yet. http://pastebin.com/d18dd5d87 -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Still no USB
No, this isn't a laptop, it is an Acer Aspire M5641 with nVidia. The earlier reply mentioned it found a mouse, I have no mouse attached. I thought about removing everything and booting. I'll try that next. I compile new kernels with the drive in an external enclosure. I can't boot with the drive in the PC. So I have to then take it how and place it back in the PC. Time consuming, but it works. greg -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Still no USB
I have been away from LFS for a few days, but now back to it. I did confirm the system is up by by installing SSH and DHCP. I can bring up the system, which has no keyboard access, but log into from another machine. Below is the latest output of sys.log. Does anyone know what the error means? I keep getting errors which say "device not accepting address ..., error 110 http://pastebin.com/mddbe1a2 -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Cleanest boot yet that didn't work
> The dmesg you posted earlier from Centos shows that your > system uses OHCI. > just build with > > CONFIG_USB_OHCI_HCD=y > # CONFIG_USB_UHCI_HCD is not set > > Andy I tried this and it locked up even earlier. There is a config file in the boot directory of Centos and it has both set as modules. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Cleanest boot yet that didn't work
OK, I took the suggestion of make both [r...@localhost boot]# grep CONFIG_USB_OHCI_HCD config-2.6.32.7 CONFIG_USB_OHCI_HCD=m [r...@localhost boot]# grep CONFIG_USB_UHCI_HCD config-2.6.32.7 CONFIG_USB_UHCI_HCD=m [r...@localhost boot]# http://pastebin.com/d2117ee27 I am still getting this error at the very end of sys.log: device not accepting address 5, error -110. In fact this error shows up three times with different addresses. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
I grepped the output of CentOs dmesg
I grepped "USB" from the dmesg file. http://pastebin.com/d7fba -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: I posted the sys.log file
> Did you compare the CentOS dmesg with the one from LFS? > > -- Bruce Well, dmesg from CentOS doesn't have any errors or warnings. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: I posted the sys.log file
Yes, the sys.log I attached is a result of leaving one out. It changed the symptoms slightly, but it still didn't work. I will try leaving the other out tomorrow. But I have a working Centos system and the kernel that is working has a config file and I think both were enabled. I just thought someone else might see something I overlooked. --- On Wed, 2/17/10, Trent Shea wrote: > From: Trent Shea > Subject: Re: I posted the sys.log file > To: "LFS Support List" > Date: Wednesday, February 17, 2010, 7:37 PM > On Wednesday 17 February 2010 > 20:11:54 brown wrap wrote: > > I posted the last boot. I see a warning regarding the > order of loading > > modules, but its the errors at the end that is > worrisome. > > > > Have you tried as Andrew suggested? > > >From the descriptions while configuring the kernel it > sounds like UHCI is for > intel/via and OHCI is for others, you may even get away > with disabling both, > and using "Root Hub Transaction Translators" (found under > EHCI.) I'm afraid I > only have intel and via hardware handy. Try googling around > for a sample config > file, there's probably a few posted here and there, maybe > even in this mailing > list's archives. > > Stick with it though, once you get it you don't have to > futz with very often. > > -- > Regards, > Trent. > -- > 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
I posted the sys.log file
I posted the last boot. I see a warning regarding the order of loading modules, but its the errors at the end that is worrisome. http://pastebin.com/m7950b00b -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: I finally figured out how to post the config and get a reference number
> > > > > > lspci | grep USB > > > > > > That may give us a clue. > > > > > > -- Bruce > > > > Here you go: > I seem to recall a bunch of trial and error to get my first > kernel built. > > -- > Regards, > Trent. That lspci output is from a working system. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: I finally figured out how to post the config and get a reference number
> Nothing jumps out as missing, but can you give us the > results of > > lspci | grep USB > > That may give us a clue. > > -- Bruce Here you go: [r...@localhost boot]# /sbin/lspci |grep USB 00:04.0 USB Controller: nVidia Corporation GeForce 7100/nForce 630i USB (rev a1) 00:04.1 USB Controller: nVidia Corporation MCP73 [nForce 630i] USB 2.0 Controller (EHCI) (rev a1) [r...@localhost boot]# -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
I finally figured out how to post the config and get a reference number
I posted my config file yesterday, but didn't know how to get the reference #. Here it is: pastebin.com/m4994360d -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Still trying to bring up LFS, is there a network connection?
> > dhcp is not a part of LFS. There is no reason you > can't use a static IP > instead. However, you can build dhcp from > BLFS if you want. > > You will need ot build openssl and openssh and start sshd > from a boot > script to log in remotely. > > Are you by any chance building this in a VM? If so, > which one? > > The only time I've heard of anyone having problmes with usb > are when the > drivers are not built into the kernel properly. > > -- Bruce > No, not a VM system. I have had problems with this machine's USB ports in the past, come right up on the LiveCD and Centos, but not on my install. I am sure its the settings, but can't figure out what are the correct settings. I tried using the config file in the centos boot directory, but that didn't even mount the root filesystem, so it has other problems. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Still trying to bring up LFS, is there a network connection?
I have still not managed to log into my new LFS system. I believe the system is up, it gets all the way to the login prompt. I can see in sys.log that the root filesystem gets mounted and I created a swap partition that gets added. So I am still stuck with the USB not working. My question is, is the network active? I really can't tell. I see the network startup script, but don't find anything that starts up dhcp. If I could start up the network, I could at least log into it for another computer. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Posted my config file
I have never used pastebin.com, but just tried it to. I didn't get any sort of reference number, but didn't get any sort of reference number. So the post just says 'Greg'. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: I compiled the kernel again, still no keyboard
I tried to post a reply and it was rejected. Of the setting that were listed, there was only one that was different: config-2.6.32.7:CONFIG_INPUT_FF_MEMLESS=y The kernel that work in my Centos environment came prebuilt. Someone posted a site where one could post their large files, don't remember what it was, but if I get it, I can post my CONFIG file and sys.log. I think the system does boot up, since one of the last things I see in sys.log is the mounting of /dev/sda1. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: How is the LiveCD different from actual Version 6.6-rc1 build?
> CONFIG_USB_HID=y > Is the important option for USB input devices > > Andy > -- Just checked, its there: root:/# cd /boot root:/boot# grep CONFIG_USB_HID * config-2.6.32.7:CONFIG_USB_HID=y config-2.6.32.7:CONFIG_USB_HIDDEV=y -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
I compiled the kernel again, still no keyboard
I double checked and the usb stull was selected, and not as a module either. It was selected to be built in. What is operating at the time of the grub menu? I can select between the two entries, the default and the rescue, but neither works. What is running at that point? The keyboard works at that point. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: How is the LiveCD different from actual Version 6.6-rc1 build?
> It looks to me like you might not have everything you need > supported > in your kernel. You might want to configure and install the > kernel > again. Checking the config a lot closer this time. I found this line in the .config file: CONFIG_USB_SUPPORT=y I don't have any problem in recompiling the kernel, but I don't want to end up with the same result. I have a version of KNOPPIX 6.1 and the usb keyboard doesn't work on it either, but as I said it does work on 6.6-rc1 and Centos 5.4. I guess I need to know where in the kernel to set the appropriate usb support. Here is the Centos kernel: [r...@localhost linux-2.6.32.7]# uname -ra Linux localhost.localdomain 2.6.18-164.11.1.el5xen #1 SMP Wed Jan 20 08:06:04 EST 2010 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: How is the LiveCD different from actual Version 6.6-rc1 build?
--- On Tue, 2/16/10, stosss wrote: > Did you build USB support into your kernel? I thought I had built usb support. I find modules in the /boot/grub directory: [r...@localhost modprobe.d]# ls -l /mnt/lfs/boot/grub/|grep usb -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 3232 Feb 15 05:57 usb_keyboard.mod -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 4140 Feb 15 05:57 usb.mod -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 3760 Feb 15 05:57 usbms.mod -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2968 Feb 15 05:57 usbtest.mod But I am confused about: # Begin /etc/modprobe.d/usb.conf install ohci_hcd /sbin/modprobe ehci_hcd ; /sbin/modprobe -i ohci_hcd ; true install uhci_hcd /sbin/modprobe ehci_hcd ; /sbin/modprobe -i uhci_hcd ; true # End /etc/modprobe.d/usb.conf Are those the correct modules? And if so, how do they get loaded? I have a regular old style serial keyboard and that didn't work either. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
How is the LiveCD different from actual Version 6.6-rc1 build?
I finally got the system to boot, but couldn't do anything with it. I thought the system was locked up, but I now believe it was just the keyboard was being recognized. I then went back and booted from the LiveLFS cd. I was able to mount the system I built and look at the sys.log file. I didn't see any apparent errors. I do notice when the build of Version 6.6-rc1 boots up I do see what appears to be problems with the usb, and I found this in sys.log: Feb 16 09:40:21 guajome-dome kernel: [ 17.422020] usb 1-2: new high speed USB device using ehci_hcd and address 3 Feb 16 09:40:21 guajome-dome kernel: [ 22.432022] usb 1-2: khubd timed out on ep0in len=18/64 Feb 16 09:40:21 guajome-dome kernel: [ 22.483268] ehci_hcd :00:04.1: port 2 high speed Feb 16 09:40:21 guajome-dome kernel: [ 22.483271] ehci_hcd :00:04.1: GetStatus port 2 status 001005 POWER sig=se0 PE CONNECT Feb 16 09:40:21 guajome-dome kernel: [ 27.544021] usb 1-2: khubd timed out on ep0out len=0/0 Feb 16 09:40:21 guajome-dome kernel: [ 32.755021] usb 1-2: khubd timed out on ep0out len=0/0 It looks to me like none of the usb ports are working, but they work under the LiveCD, version 6.3. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Finally got it to boot, but
I received an error when it got up to starting the network. The error said to report it to lfs-dev, which I will. I finally gave up on trying to setup the external drive, which had LFS on the 2nd partition. I bought a small SATA drive, tarred things up and moved it over to the new drive. I set it up and it brought up a menu and started to boot until I received the error. I'll continue when I hear back. I've had lots of trouble with this machine not being compatible with OSes, but linux always works. Solaris doesn't like a number of things on this machine which is a ACER Aspire M5641. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Booting problems again
I wanted to install LFS on a fresh partition and this was the only unused SATA drive I had. I had small IDE drives, but this computer doesn't have an IDE interface. And when it comes to cost now $40 gets you double this size. I could repartition the drive, but I am trying to avoid it. I installed a ZFS filesystem on the first partition and I'd hate to get rid of it, but I can. Anyway, I can't do anything with it right now. I'm not near the machine. --- On Fri, 2/12/10, Simon Geard wrote: > From: Simon Geard > Subject: Re: Booting problems again > To: lfs-support@linuxfromscratch.org > Date: Friday, February 12, 2010, 7:32 PM > On Fri, 2010-02-12 at 20:48 -0600, > Bruce Dubbs wrote: > > IMO, 750G is way too big for an LFS partition. > > Well, not *too* big, in the sense of causing problems. > "Unnecessarily > big" might be a better wording, and I'd agree. > > Separating data from applications is practically a > necessity when it > comes to upgrading / reinstalling things in future, and > 20Gb is more > than enough for applications. > > Simon. > > -Inline Attachment Follows- > > -- > 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: Booting problems again
A little more. I didn't list the size of the disks because I didn't think it was important, but since the legacy GRUB may not be able to handle them: sda is small, I am not at the machine until Sunday or Monday. sdb is one TB that I just store stuff on. sdc is the disk with LFS on it. It is 1.5 TB. I partitioned it right down the middle and LFS is on the 2nd partition /dev/sdc2. I wasn't aware that the old grub, the only grub I knew about up to now, had problems with large disks. but then again, all of the system I've set up had small boot disks. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Booting problems again
Let me start over and maybe I can make things clear. I built the LFS using Centos 5.4, running with the old GRUB. Here is my system layout: /dev/sda has Centos with its swap being the 2nd partiton. /dev/sdb I use to download files and store things. /dev/sdc is two partitions, sdc1 and sdc2 In reading the book, it said to set aside a partiton for LFS, that was /dev/sdc2 I built it, step-by-step, and didn't realize until it was built that there was a new GRUB. So I followed the instruction for the new GRUB, but of course that was installed on /dev/sdc2. So When I boot up, its using the legacy GRUB and I tried to modify that so it would see the 3rd drive and its 2nd partition, sdc2. At this point I could remove sda and put sdc in its place, but LFS would still be on the 2nd partition, but I hope to avoid this. I could remove sdc1, but I'd rather not. Or start all over again iif I did move sdc to sda's slot. I hope this make sense. So bottom line is I am trying to take the entries generated by GRUB2 and modify grub.conf by adding a new entry for sdc1. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Booting problems
> Did you read this in the book: > > GRUB uses its own naming structure for drives and > partitions in the > form of (hdn,m), where n is the hard drive number and m is > the > partition number, both starting from zero. For example, > partition hda1 > is (hd0,0) to GRUB and hdb3 is (hd1,2). In contrast to > Linux, GRUB > does not consider CD-ROM drives to be hard drives. For > example, if > using a CD on hdb and a second hard drive on hdc, that > second hard > drive would still be (hd1). Yes, sorry I screwed that up. I had even ran the command: grub-mkdevicemap --device-map=device.map Which yielded: (hd0) /dev/sda (hd1) /dev/sdb (hd2) /dev/sdc (hd3) /dev/sdh Thank you, I missed that. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Booting problems
> > Because the syntax is wrong. See the example in the > book. > Also, the kernel line is probably wrong if you didn't set > up a separate > /boot partition. > > It's really hard maintain patience when users ask questions > without > trying to do some research, like reading the book, on their > own. > > It's also hard to help when the information supplied is > basically "It > doesn't work" with virtually no details. > > -- Bruce > -- > http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support > FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html > Unsubscribe: See the above information page > If you don't want to answer a question, simply ignore it. I read the book and was replying to someone who asked what was the error. I supplied information the first time I asked the question. When I supply to much I hear 'trim you entries'. As far as supplying the details, read the book contains no details at all. The syntax is wrong, contains no details as well. You don't need any patience, if you don't like the question, just delete it. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Booting problems
> So what was the error? Was this second entry to try to boot > grub2 on sdc2? Did grub2 load or did it > quit with an error? Did grub2 fail to boot the kernel? > > Andy > -- > http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support > FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html > Unsubscribe: See the above information page > The first time I tried to modify the old grub.conf, I just add the lines created by the new grub.cfg, must made them adhere to the format used in grub.conf. That attempted boot, resulted in no such partition. So I changed the grub.conf to: title GNU/Linux, with Linux 2.6.32.7-lfs-6.6-rc1 root (hd2,1) kernel /vmlinux-2.6.32.7-lfs-6.6-rc1 root=/dev/sdc2 That just brought up an empty menu with no selection at all. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Booting problems
> Did you follow the instructions and boot GRUB2 from GRUB > Legacy to test > it out before updating the MBR? > > -- Bruce I must have missed them. I will go back and look. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Booting problems
I finshed compiling everything but can't boot. Here's my problem. I have two internal disks and one external: /dev/sda /dev/sdb /dev/sdc In reading the book, it said to set aside a partition for LFS. I did, it was the 2nd partition of sdc, sdc2 So as one of my last steps I set up grub, but it was installed on sdc2. I then realized it was the new grub, or grub2. I tried to modify my existing grub, the old grub, to add a new entry. I was able to select the new entry, but not boot. So here is my question. If I move the external drive inside and make it the first drive, will I be able to boot, even though LFS is on the 2nd partiton? I don't want to, but I could move everyting over to the first partition, but I'd have to wipe it out, which I don't want to do. I thought as I was going through the book, this would be a problem since I never encountered a warning that it had to be on the first partition. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Making a Rescue cdrom
In 8.4.1 there is a procedure to build a rescue floppy. The procedure uses grub-mkrescue which would support a cdrom if genisoimage. Has anyone figured out a way to make a rescue cdrom? -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Setting up /etc/fstab
Well thanks again. I have 4 gig of memory, so for now I will just go without swap. --- On Wed, 2/10/10, Andrew Benton wrote: > From: Andrew Benton > Subject: Re: Setting up /etc/fstab > To: lfs-support@linuxfromscratch.org > Date: Wednesday, February 10, 2010, 4:59 PM > On 11/02/10 00:19, brown wrap wrote: > > But once I boot to the kernel I built > for LFS, won't LVM be out of the picture? I went into > gparted and I think I found the device that is swap, > > I think its /dev/sda2 and my '/' partition should be > /dev/sdc2. > > > > I was hoping to keep my Centos system and have the > option of booting to LFS. > > Is that possible? > > > The only way to know is to try it. For what it's worth, > it's not > essential for /etc/fstab to be perfect to boot. The kernel > mounts > whatever partition grub tells it to mount. If that > conflicts with > whatever is in fstab then the kernel ignores fstab. You > don't need a > swap partition to boot. You don't even need an fstab. It'll > be ugly, > some of the bootscripts will fail, but there's no reason > why it won't > boot to a command prompt and let you log in. > > Andy > -- > 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: Setting up /etc/fstab
> If you are using LVM, then you need an initrd and that is > out of scope > for LFS. > > -- Bruce > -- But once I boot to the kernel I built for LFS, won't LVM be out of the picture? I went into gparted and I think I found the device that is swap, I think its /dev/sda2 and my '/' partition should be /dev/sdc2. I was hoping to keep my Centos system and have the option of booting to LFS. Is that possible? -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Setting up /etc/fstab
Ok, I built my system on an external drive. It has two partitions, busically I split a 1.5 TB right down the middle. I used the 2nd partition for the build. I have not reached the grub section yet. What my intention was to modify my existing grub to point to the partition with LFS on it and boot. So I am at the point to create /etc/fstab and its looking for the root partition and swap devices. Here are my present two lines for the root and swap on Centos: /dev/VolGroup00/LogVol00 / ext3defaults 1 1 /dev/VolGroup00/LogVol01 swap swapdefaults 0 0 and my present LFS partition: /dev/sdc2 /mnt/lfs ext3defaults 1 5 I am not sure that after booting the current '/' and swap will be recognized as they are now. Or if /mnt/lfs will be recognized as /dev/sdc2. If they are, I can set up the LFS fstab. Has anyone tried a similar setup? -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Lots of errors in building grub docs in Version 6.6-rc1
> Yes, I'm working with the grub project to update the > documentation. In > the meantime, ignore the grub.texi errors. Most of > the documentation > that is in there is obsolete anyway. > > -- Bruce OK, thank you. I hadn't hit 'install' yet. Now I will proceed. Thanks again. greg -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Lots of errors in building grub docs in Version 6.6-rc1
../docs/grub.texi:89: Menu reference to nonexistent node `Invoking the grub shell' (perhaps incorrect sectioning?). ../docs/grub.texi:88: Menu reference to nonexistent node `Troubleshooting' (perhaps incorrect sectioning?). ../docs/grub.texi:84: Menu reference to nonexistent node `Images' (perhaps incorrect sectioning?). ../docs/grub.texi:83: Menu reference to nonexistent node `Preset Menu' (perhaps incorrect sectioning?). ../docs/grub.texi:81: Menu reference to nonexistent node `Network' (perhaps incorrect sectioning?). ../docs/grub.texi:80: Menu reference to nonexistent node `Configuration' (perhaps incorrect sectioning?). ../docs/grub.texi:964: warning: unreferenced node `Menu entry editor'. I received about 50 or more lines like the about when building grub in Chapter 6. Everything seemed to compile ok, but the build of the documentation seemed to have a lot of problems. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: How do you interpet gcc test results?
--- On Sat, 2/6/10, Bruce Dubbs wrote: > From: Bruce Dubbs > Subject: Re: How do you interpet gcc test results? > To: "LFS Support List" > Date: Saturday, February 6, 2010, 9:49 AM > brown wrap wrote: > > My last email was regarding the test results of GCC. > From my first > > run of the test I thought the output had indicated the > gcc had > > failed. I was told to proceed, which I did. Then I > started the "make > > -k check" and it took so long I thought my machine was > hung and its a > > quad core with 3 gigs of memory. I ran the summary > which I have > > attached and it contained a number of errors, so many > I thought > > something was wrong, but I was able to continue and > compile Sed in > > Chapter 6. So I am asking, what do the test results > mean? Yes, there > > were a number of errors, so many that I something was > seriously > > wrong, but they don't seem to make any difference. > > Try reading the book. > > "Results can be compared with those located at > http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/build-logs/6.6-rc1/ > and > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/. > > A few unexpected failures cannot always be avoided. The GCC > developers > are usually aware of these issues, but have not resolved > them yet. In > particular, the libmudflap tests are known be particularly > problematic > as a result of a bug in GCC > (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20003). > Unless the test > results are vastly different from those at the above URL, > it is safe to > continue." > > You have exactly 6 failures out of about 9. > That's not "so many". > > -- Bruce > -- > http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support > FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html > Unsubscribe: See the above information page > Yeah I read that prior to asking. Thanks for the insight. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
How do you interpet gcc test results?
My last email was regarding the test results of GCC. From my first run of the test I thought the output had indicated the gcc had failed. I was told to proceed, which I did. Then I started the "make -k check" and it took so long I thought my machine was hung and its a quad core with 3 gigs of memory. I ran the summary which I have attached and it contained a number of errors, so many I thought something was wrong, but I was able to continue and compile Sed in Chapter 6. So I am asking, what do the test results mean? Yes, there were a number of errors, so many that I something was seriously wrong, but they don't seem to make any difference. gcc-test-results Description: Binary data -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Finished all of 1st pass, build of glibc fails
> Please follow the *final* instruction in > > | cp -v ../glibc-2.11.1/iconvdata/gconv-modules iconvdata > | make -k check 2>&1 | tee glibc-check-log > | grep Error glibc-check-log > > At this point, nobody knows if there was 1 error > (probably > not a big deal), or 1500 (definitely bad). > > Also, check if you installed perl correctly, and if you > have > missed any of the essential symlinks. > > ĸen I guess I was the only one in the universe confused by the directions, I continued on and the "make -k check" didn't find any errors.When I saw the initial errors, I thought it best not to continue. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Finished all of 1st pass, build of glibc fails
make[1]: Target `check' not remade because of errors. make[1]: Leaving directory `/sources/lfs-6.6/glibc-2.11.1' make: *** [check] Error 2 I finally finshed the build of the first pass and now started the 2nd. the make of glibc fails, but it really doesn't supply a whole lot of information. I am hoping someone has seen this. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Can't Compile tar-1.22
sed: error while loading shared libraries: libselinux.so.1: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory sed: error while loading shared libraries: libselinux.so.1: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory I was proceeding with the first pass of Version 6.6-rc1 and ran into the above error during the configure phase. I don't find a patch for the tar and the instructions are simply configure and make. Of course if I compile it was root, it finds the library. I had the same problem with tar-1.20. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Has anyone been able to build LFS on a 64bit system?
I am following the instructions, but as you can see from below, it blew up on
the 2nd pass of binutils. The first 'check' on gcc seems to pass:
lfs:/mnt/lfs/sources/6.6$ cd gcc-build
lfs:/mnt/lfs/sources/6.6/gcc-build$ echo 'main(){}' > dummy.c
lfs:/mnt/lfs/sources/6.6/gcc-build$ $LFS_TGT-gcc -B/tools/lib dummy.c
lfs:/mnt/lfs/sources/6.6/gcc-build$ readelf -l a.out | grep ': /tools'
[Requesting program interpreter: /tools/lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2]
But the 2nd test in binutils failed.
--- On Wed, 2/3/10, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
From: Bruce Dubbs
Subject: Re: Has anyone been able to build LFS on a 64bit system?
To: "LFS Support List"
Date: Wednesday, February 3, 2010, 10:19 PM
Justin P. Mattock wrote:
> On 02/03/10 20:25, brown wrap wrote:
>> Yesterday I thought I had made it through pass one. That was probably
>> because any of the compiles I made didn't require the tests being run.
>> So today I started off with pass 2, and the I think it was glibc failed
>> right off the bat. So when I saw the new release of 6.6, I thought I'd
>> start all over with it. Now I can't get gcc to compile:
>>
>> checking for x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu-gcc...
>> /mnt/lfs/sources/6.6/gcc-build/./gcc/xgcc
>> -B/mnt/lfs/sources/6.6/gcc-build/./gcc/
>> -B/tools/x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu/bin/ -B/tools/x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu/lib/
>> -isystem /tools/x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu/include -isystem
>> /tools/x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu/sys-include
>> checking for suffix of object files... configure: error: in
>> `/mnt/lfs/sources/6.6/gcc-build/x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu/libgcc':
>> configure: error: cannot compute suffix of object files: cannot compile
>> See `config.log' for more details.
>> make[1]: *** [configure-target-libgcc] Error 1
>> make[1]: Leaving directory `/mnt/lfs/sources/6.6/gcc-build'
>> make: *** [all] Error 2
> if your wanting to build an x86_64 look at clfs
> there you choose if you want pure64 or multilib
No, that's not necessary. You only need to follow those instructions if
you are trying to do 32->64 or want to build a multi-lib system.
I'm currently building 6.6-rc1 as a pure 64-bit system, its working on
Chapter 6 GCC now. The GCC build was fine. It's doing the tests. There
are no problems so far. The only requirement is to start from a 64-bit
distro (and to follow directions).
-- Bruce
--
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: Has anyone been able to build LFS on a 64bit system?
OK, thank you. I just need a pure 64 bit machine. I tried to build LFS on 32 bit and it was way too slow. --- On Wed, 2/3/10, Justin P. Mattock wrote: From: Justin P. Mattock Subject: Re: Has anyone been able to build LFS on a 64bit system? To: "LFS Support List" Date: Wednesday, February 3, 2010, 8:42 PM On 02/03/10 20:25, brown wrap wrote: > Yesterday I thought I had made it through pass one. That was probably > because any of the compiles I made didn't require the tests being run. > So today I started off with pass 2, and the I think it was glibc failed > right off the bat. So when I saw the new release of 6.6, I thought I'd > start all over with it. Now I can't get gcc to compile: > > checking for x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu-gcc... > /mnt/lfs/sources/6.6/gcc-build/./gcc/xgcc > -B/mnt/lfs/sources/6.6/gcc-build/./gcc/ > -B/tools/x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu/bin/ -B/tools/x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu/lib/ > -isystem /tools/x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu/include -isystem > /tools/x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu/sys-include > checking for suffix of object files... configure: error: in > `/mnt/lfs/sources/6.6/gcc-build/x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu/libgcc': > configure: error: cannot compute suffix of object files: cannot compile > See `config.log' for more details. > make[1]: *** [configure-target-libgcc] Error 1 > make[1]: Leaving directory `/mnt/lfs/sources/6.6/gcc-build' > make: *** [all] Error 2 > > if your wanting to build an x86_64 look at clfs there you choose if you want pure64 or multilib Justin P. Mattock -- 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
Has anyone been able to build LFS on a 64bit system?
Yesterday I thought I had made it through pass one. That was probably because any of the compiles I made didn't require the tests being run. So today I started off with pass 2, and the I think it was glibc failed right off the bat. So when I saw the new release of 6.6, I thought I'd start all over with it. Now I can't get gcc to compile: checking for x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu-gcc... /mnt/lfs/sources/6.6/gcc-build/./gcc/xgcc -B/mnt/lfs/sources/6.6/gcc-build/./gcc/ -B/tools/x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu/bin/ -B/tools/x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu/lib/ -isystem /tools/x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu/include -isystem /tools/x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu/sys-include checking for suffix of object files... configure: error: in `/mnt/lfs/sources/6.6/gcc-build/x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu/libgcc': configure: error: cannot compute suffix of object files: cannot compile See `config.log' for more details. make[1]: *** [configure-target-libgcc] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory `/mnt/lfs/sources/6.6/gcc-build' make: *** [all] Error 2 -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Finished First Pass
Thanks everyone for their answers as to why there are two passes. This is the paragraph I read that confused me about 32 and 64 bit machines, but it looks like I will be able to proceed according to Bruce's answer: This version of the book builds a 32-bit Linux system and requires an existing 32-bit version of of the kernel on the Intel/AMD x86 architecture. Adding capabilty for x86_64 systems is a major objective of a future version of LFS. Support for 64-bit systems and additional architectures can be found in the Cross-Compiled Linux From Scratch (CLFS) project at http://cross-lfs.org/view/svn/. --- On Tue, 2/2/10, Bruce Dubbs wrote: From: Bruce Dubbs Subject: Re: Finished First Pass To: "LFS Support List" Date: Tuesday, February 2, 2010, 4:17 PM brown wrap wrote: > I guess its still not quite clear to me why we take two passes on > various pieces of software to complete the install. Another question > I have, i thought I read somewhere that 7.0 is meant for 64 bit > release. I'm installing on a 64 bit machine and things seem to be > going, though I have ran into a few problems. I have a 32 bit > machine, but this one os so much faster. http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/development/chapter01/how.html "Chapter 5 packages are built using this second pass toolchain. When this is done, the LFS installation process will no longer depend on the host distribution, with the exception of the running kernel." http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/development/prologue/architecture.html "the instructions in this book are known to work, with some modifications, with both Power PC and 64-bit AMD/Intel CPUs. To build a system that utilizes one of these CPUs, the main prerequisite, in addition to those on the next few pages, is an existing Linux system such as an earlier LFS installation, Ubuntu, Red Hat/Fedora, SuSE, or other distribution that targets the architecture that you have." -- Bruce -- 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
Finished First Pass
I guess its still not quite clear to me why we take two passes on various pieces of software to complete the install. Another question I have, i thought I read somewhere that 7.0 is meant for 64 bit release. I'm installing on a 64 bit machine and things seem to be going, though I have ran into a few problems. I have a 32 bit machine, but this one os so much faster. greg -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
OK, I was able to build the latest version of glibc 2.11.1
I looked around and found others who had ran into the same problem. I went and downloaded the latest version of glibc 2.11.1 and that compiled and installed. rm -f /mnt/lfs/sources/6.4/glibc-build/stubs.h make[1]: Leaving directory `/mnt/lfs/sources/6.4/glibc-2.11.1' -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Version check output
I figured I'd change the subject line. Here is the output of version check: lfs:~$ ./version-check bash, version 3.2.25(1)-release /bin/sh -> /bin/bash Binutils: (GNU Binutils) 2.20 bison (GNU Bison) 2.3 /usr/bin/yacc -> /usr/bin/yacc bzip2, Version 1.0.3, 15-Feb-2005. Coreutils: 5.97 diff (GNU diffutils) 2.8.1 GNU find version 4.2.27 GNU Awk 3.1.5 /usr/bin/awk -> /bin/gawk gcc (GCC) 4.1.2 20080704 (Red Hat 4.1.2-46) GNU C Library stable release version 2.5, grep (GNU grep) 2.5.1 gzip 1.3.5 Linux version 2.6.18-164.11.1.el5xen (mockbu...@builder10.centos.org) (gcc version 4.1.2 20080704 (Red Hat 4.1.2-46)) #1 SMP Wed Jan 20 08:06:04 EST 2010 GNU M4 1.4.5 GNU Make 3.81 patch 2.5.4 Perl version='5.8.8'; GNU sed version 4.1.5 tar (GNU tar) 1.15.1 makeinfo (GNU texinfo) 4.8 Compilation OK lfs:~$ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: OK, I stumbled again on glibc
Here is the output of my version check: lfs:~$ ./version-check bash, version 3.2.25(1)-release /bin/sh -> /bin/bash Binutils: (GNU Binutils) 2.20 bison (GNU Bison) 2.3 /usr/bin/yacc -> /usr/bin/yacc bzip2, Version 1.0.3, 15-Feb-2005. Coreutils: 5.97 diff (GNU diffutils) 2.8.1 GNU find version 4.2.27 GNU Awk 3.1.5 /usr/bin/awk -> /bin/gawk gcc (GCC) 4.1.2 20080704 (Red Hat 4.1.2-46) GNU C Library stable release version 2.5, grep (GNU grep) 2.5.1 gzip 1.3.5 Linux version 2.6.18-164.11.1.el5xen (mockbu...@builder10.centos.org) (gcc version 4.1.2 20080704 (Red Hat 4.1.2-46)) #1 SMP Wed Jan 20 08:06:04 EST 2010 GNU M4 1.4.5 GNU Make 3.81 patch 2.5.4 Perl version='5.8.8'; GNU sed version 4.1.5 tar (GNU tar) 1.15.1 makeinfo (GNU texinfo) 4.8 Compilation OK lfs:~$ --- On Mon, 2/1/10, Bruce Dubbs wrote: From: Bruce Dubbs Subject: Re: OK, I stumbled again on glibc To: "LFS Support List" Date: Monday, February 1, 2010, 12:32 PM brown wrap wrote: > When I run configure it says critical programs are too old or missing. What are the results of the script in Section vii. Host System Requirements? -- Bruce -- 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: OK, I stumbled again on glibc
OK, I see where as and ld was built and installed in /tools/bin, but thats not the exact name: lfs:/mnt/lfs/sources/6.4$ ls -l /tools/bin total 55160 -rwxr-xr-x 1 lfs lfs 3633288 Feb 1 12:27 x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu-addr2line -rwxr-xr-x 2 lfs lfs 3785792 Feb 1 12:27 x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu-ar -rwxr-xr-x 2 lfs lfs 5103634 Feb 1 12:28 x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu-as -rwxr-xr-x 1 lfs lfs 3611120 Feb 1 12:27 x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu-c++filt -rwxr-xr-x 1 lfs lfs 592152 Feb 1 07:35 x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu-cpp -rwxr-xr-x 2 lfs lfs 586625 Feb 1 07:35 x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu-gcc -rwxr-xr-x 2 lfs lfs 586625 Feb 1 07:35 x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu-gcc-4.4.3 -rwxr-xr-x 1 lfs lfs 16005 Feb 1 07:35 x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu-gccbug -rwxr-xr-x 1 lfs lfs 106301 Feb 1 07:35 x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu-gcov -rwxr-xr-x 1 lfs lfs 4044995 Feb 1 12:28 x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu-gprof -rwxr-xr-x 2 lfs lfs 5009402 Feb 1 12:28 x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu-ld -rwxr-xr-x 2 lfs lfs 3675910 Feb 1 12:27 x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu-nm -rwxr-xr-x 2 lfs lfs 4363631 Feb 1 12:27 x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu-objcopy -rwxr-xr-x 2 lfs lfs 5061883 Feb 1 12:27 x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu-objdump -rwxr-xr-x 2 lfs lfs 3785791 Feb 1 12:27 x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu-ranlib -rwxr-xr-x 1 lfs lfs 698949 Feb 1 12:27 x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu-readelf -rwxr-xr-x 1 lfs lfs 3663131 Feb 1 12:27 x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu-size -rwxr-xr-x 1 lfs lfs 3640610 Feb 1 12:27 x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu-strings -rwxr-xr-x 2 lfs lfs 4363630 Feb 1 12:27 x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu-strip --- On Mon, 2/1/10, brown wrap wrote: From: brown wrap Subject: Re: OK, I stumbled again on glibc To: "LFS Support List" Date: Monday, February 1, 2010, 11:58 AM That is the environment for the lfs user. I think I set it up correctly, but I am going through it again. --- On Mon, 2/1/10, stosss wrote: From: stosss Subject: Re: OK, I stumbled again on glibc To: "LFS Support List" Date: Monday, February 1, 2010, 11:10 AM > I think I followed the setup steps. Here is my lfs environment: > > > lfs:/mnt/lfs/sources/6.4/glibc-build$ env > LDFLAGS=-L/usr/local/lib > TERM=xterm > OLDPWD=/mnt/lfs/sources/6.4/glibc-2.10.1 > LC_ALL=POSIX > LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/usr/local/lib > LFS=/mnt/lfs > PATH=/tools/bin:/bin:/usr/bin > PWD=/mnt/lfs/sources/6.4/glibc-build > LFS_TGT=x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu > PS1=\u:\w\$ > SHLVL=1 > HOME=/home/lfs > _=/bin/env > lfs:/mnt/lfs/sources/6.4/glibc-build$ I see you are building a 64 bit system I have only built a 32 bit system. The reason I asked if you followed 4.3 and 4.4 (if those are the correct chapter sections for 6.4) is because you said things work as root but not as LFS user. It sounds like you have issues with your LFS user account. I would check to make sure that account is set up correctly. The other problem which I know nothing about is a 64 bit system misbehaves in ways that a 32 bit system does not. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page -Inline Attachment Follows- -- 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: OK, I stumbled again on glibc
That is the environment for the lfs user. I think I set it up correctly, but I am going through it again. --- On Mon, 2/1/10, stosss wrote: From: stosss Subject: Re: OK, I stumbled again on glibc To: "LFS Support List" Date: Monday, February 1, 2010, 11:10 AM > I think I followed the setup steps. Here is my lfs environment: > > > lfs:/mnt/lfs/sources/6.4/glibc-build$ env > LDFLAGS=-L/usr/local/lib > TERM=xterm > OLDPWD=/mnt/lfs/sources/6.4/glibc-2.10.1 > LC_ALL=POSIX > LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/usr/local/lib > LFS=/mnt/lfs > PATH=/tools/bin:/bin:/usr/bin > PWD=/mnt/lfs/sources/6.4/glibc-build > LFS_TGT=x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu > PS1=\u:\w\$ > SHLVL=1 > HOME=/home/lfs > _=/bin/env > lfs:/mnt/lfs/sources/6.4/glibc-build$ I see you are building a 64 bit system I have only built a 32 bit system. The reason I asked if you followed 4.3 and 4.4 (if those are the correct chapter sections for 6.4) is because you said things work as root but not as LFS user. It sounds like you have issues with your LFS user account. I would check to make sure that account is set up correctly. The other problem which I know nothing about is a 64 bit system misbehaves in ways that a 32 bit system does not. -- 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: OK, I stumbled again on glibc
I think I followed the setup steps. Here is my lfs environment: lfs:/mnt/lfs/sources/6.4/glibc-build$ env LDFLAGS=-L/usr/local/lib TERM=xterm OLDPWD=/mnt/lfs/sources/6.4/glibc-2.10.1 LC_ALL=POSIX LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/usr/local/lib LFS=/mnt/lfs PATH=/tools/bin:/bin:/usr/bin PWD=/mnt/lfs/sources/6.4/glibc-build LFS_TGT=x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu PS1=\u:\w\$ SHLVL=1 HOME=/home/lfs _=/bin/env lfs:/mnt/lfs/sources/6.4/glibc-build$ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: OK, I stumbled again on glibc
I am in Chapter 5, the first pass. --- On Mon, 2/1/10, stosss wrote: From: stosss Subject: Re: OK, I stumbled again on glibc To: "LFS Support List" Date: Monday, February 1, 2010, 10:52 AM > When I run configure it says critical programs are too old or missing. I am > logged into that window as user lfs. I looked at the environament and > compared it to root's env and the paths looks the same. But if I run > configure as root, I get no complaints. Here is the error, it looks to me > likes its complaining about as and/or ld, but the paths to each is the same > for both users: > > /mnt/lfs/sources/6.4/glibc-build$ ../glibc-2.10.1/configure > --prefix=/tools --host=$LFS_TGT > --build=$(../glibc-2.10.1/scripts/config.guess) --disable-profile > --enable-add-ons --enable-kernel=2.6.18 --with-headers=/tools/include > libc_cv_forced_unwind=yes libc_cv_c_cleanup=yesq../glibcq > LDFLAGS=-L/usr/local/lib > > checking whether autoconf works... yes > configure: error: > *** These critical programs are missing or too old: as ld > *** Check the INSTALL file for required versions. > lfs:/mnt/lfs/sources/6.4/glibc-build$ Are you in chapter 5 or 6? Did you follow chapter 4.3 and 4.4 correctly? -- 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
OK, I stumbled again on glibc
When I run configure it says critical programs are too old or missing. I am logged into that window as user lfs. I looked at the environament and compared it to root's env and the paths looks the same. But if I run configure as root, I get no complaints. Here is the error, it looks to me likes its complaining about as and/or ld, but the paths to each is the same for both users: /mnt/lfs/sources/6.4/glibc-build$ ../glibc-2.10.1/configure --prefix=/tools --host=$LFS_TGT --build=$(../glibc-2.10.1/scripts/config.guess) --disable-profile --enable-add-ons --enable-kernel=2.6.18 --with-headers=/tools/include libc_cv_forced_unwind=yes libc_cv_c_cleanup=yesq../glibcq LDFLAGS=-L/usr/local/lib checking whether autoconf works... yes configure: error: *** These critical programs are missing or too old: as ld *** Check the INSTALL file for required versions. lfs:/mnt/lfs/sources/6.4/glibc-build$ -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Trying to follow 6.5 instructions, but
Yes, it was gcc. That worked, though what I had tried previously, compiling mpfr and gmp seperately, and configuring gcc with the switches --with-gmp and --with-mpfr, didn't, but I won't concern myself with that. I can move on now. Thanks for the help. I am sure I will stumble again. --- On Mon, 2/1/10, Andrew Benton wrote: From: Andrew Benton Subject: Re: Trying to follow 6.5 instructions, but To: lfs-support@linuxfromscratch.org Date: Monday, February 1, 2010, 4:05 AM On 01/02/10 06:16, Bruce Dubbs wrote: > brown wrap wrote: >> I am trying to follow the 6.5 instructions, but running iinto >> problems. First in trying to build gmp and mpfr, there are >> instructions to untar their files and move their directories to new >> names. Tha's it, no further instructions that I see. BTW, I am using >> the online instructions: >> >> http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/6.5/ >> >> >> So I used the instructions found in the 2nd build. Then when trying >> to build gcc I get the following error. Have these errors been fixed >> or am I doing something wrong. Thanks. > > You probably didn't `cd binutils-2.19.1` before unpacking gmp and mpfr. > Err, shouldn't that be gcc? Andy -- 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
Trying to follow 6.5 instructions, but
I am trying to follow the 6.5 instructions, but running iinto problems. First in trying to build gmp and mpfr, there are instructions to untar their files and move their directories to new names. Tha's it, no further instructions that I see. BTW, I am using the online instructions: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/6.5/ So I used the instructions found in the 2nd build. Then when trying to build gcc I get the following error. Have these errors been fixed or am I doing something wrong. Thanks. checking for x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu-gcc... /mnt/lfs/sources/6.4/gcc-build/./gcc/xgcc -B/mnt/lfs/sources/6.4/gcc-build/./gcc/ -B/tools/x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu/bin/ -B/tools/x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu/lib/ -isystem /tools/x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu/include -isystem /tools/x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu/sys-include checking for suffix of object files... configure: error: in `/mnt/lfs/sources/6.4/gcc-build/x86_64-lfs-linux-gnu/libgcc': configure: error: cannot compute suffix of object files: cannot compile See `config.log' for more details. make[1]: *** [configure-target-libgcc] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory `/mnt/lfs/sources/6.4/gcc-build' make: *** [all] Error 2 -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
