Can't get past Bzip2

WarmFuzzy hugo1301 at
Wed Dec 27 17:46:48 PST 2000

barry at wrote:
> Jesse Tie Ten Quee wrote:
> >
> > Yo,
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 27, 2000 at 08:01:06AM -0800, WarmFuzzy wrote:
> > > lrwxrwxrwx   1 root    root    21 Dec 25 16:10 /usr/bin/gcc ->
> > > /etc/alternatives/gcc.
> >
> > Nono... inside chroot, where your having this problem..this is in chroot
> > right? (or did i read something wrong..?)

Sorry Jesse, I'm only on the static version of Bzip2. Barely the third
package to compile.

> > Jesse Tie Ten Quee - highos at highos dot com
> at least Red Hat gives the kgcc package, though...
> and, isn't bzip2 also in the static compilation?
> I think that the important question here is whether this was the static
> bzip2 or the dynamic (chroot'ed) bzip2...
> if so, that is if it were the static compilation, they would have only
> had to compile bash and binutils initially.  Did either of these
> packages show any strange behavior during compile time?  That might clue
> us in on what may be happening.  Further, was $LFS set?  

Neither Bash nor Binutils showed any weird behavior and yes, $LFS was

> Perhaps a fix might be to skip to compiling gcc on the current system
> (which may not work if this problem is that severe) and then start from
> bzip2 again...

If you think this might work I'd be willing to try that. I suppose there
is still the possibility that I typed the commands in wrong. I'll try to
compile Bzip2 once more. The other thing is that I tried to do a minimal
install. Could it be that I left some packages out? I believe it was
Binutils that failed because flex wasn't installed. That one was easy
because during configure I got a message stating that it couldn't find
flex. Not being able to find a program that I know is installed is a bit
more baffling to me. So what do you think?


Unsubscribe: send email to lfs-discuss-request at
and put unsubscribe in the subject header of the message

More information about the lfs-dev mailing list