Balu's 2.4.2 post-chroot

Thomas 'Balu' Walter tw at
Tue Oct 24 01:56:57 PDT 2000

+-Gerard Beekmans-(gerard at[24.10.00 00:43]:
> On Mon, 23 Oct 2000, you wrote:
> > Okay - here is the log of my post-chroot-Installation of 2.4.2-Book...
> > Just ~190 lines this time ;)
> only 190? Shame on ya

/me goes standing in the corner (or korner after KDE2 release :)
I'll try to create some more lines...

> > Is localedef really necessary? While installing glibc we already
> > do "make install_root=$LFS localedata/install-locales" - isn't
> > that doing the same?
> Not sure, it's not my invention. What i know if: the make 
> localedata/install-locales installs all the locale files. The localdef 
> command sets one of the locales (ie: iwth localedef you can change from one 
> to another)

I just took a look at the glibc localedata/Makefile - right at the end
it does the following: (comments by me ;)

# Which Makefile-target (called with make install-locales)
        # Read file "SUPPORTED" (see at the end) and do a loop over the
        # content with the variables locale and charset.
        # SUPPORTED contains lines like "de_DE ISO-8859-1"
        while read locale charset; do \

           # if the locale is commented, ignore and do next
           case $$locale in \#*) continue;; esac; \

           # Localedef anything found in that file
           # (this is a short for "I think it does that, but what makes 
           # the sed-part?")
           $(LOCALEDEF) -i locales/`echo $$locale | sed 's/\([^.]*\).*/\1/'` \
                        -c -f charmaps/$$charset \
                        -u repertoiremaps/mnemonic.ds \
                        $(inst_localedir)/$$locale; \
        done < SUPPORTED

This looks to me like it does install many many locales (including the
ones we need), I think, so localedef should not be necessary, or?
Localedef-Experts anywhere?

> >         Install less/more before chroot? I just wanted to pipe ls
> >         through one of those to see all the ISO-Files...
> Hmm...might be a good idea. Anybody else have a comment on it?
> On the other hand, open new virtual console/xterm, do ls $LFS/usr/blah/blah | 
> less and you get the same effect...


> > After chroot time does not work anymore, so I can not display
> > compilation-times here... Why?
> Don't know. Perhaps not enough has been installed yet?

I am not sure, the time command is there, (otherwise I would have seen
an error), but it does not display the time - perhaps it does not work
in chroot...

> > Installing Man
> >         Different language-packages? ./configure +lang de,en,nl or
> >         +lang all... -ask? I need to have a closer look at this...

This was a reminder for me ;) There are only two or three german
man-pages included, so I think it is not needed...

> >         INSTALL-File says: "follow FHS by putting cat pages under
> >         /var/cache/man provided that that directory exists." - Create
> >         it?

But we should create this dir to make it possible for make to install

> >         Do we need to set up the makewhatis-database?
> Don't let the book stop you...those things are up to the reader. A simple 
> reading of the documentation will tell the user that. How far should we go 
> with dictating what somebody can or should do.

Agreed, I remembered that after reading the "apropos-problems"-mail
that was posted yesterday(?). After all I think apropos is a nice
feature. What do others think about this?

> > Installing Man-pages
> >         The README contains information on "make"ing an install without
> >         overwriting newer man-pages - does that work?
> I never tested it, a 
>      yes n|cp -avi man* /usr/share/man
> works just as well ;)
> It does date checks thta always makes me wary. What if the date isn't set 
> properly, so it overwrites files anyways. I rather do a "never overwrite 
> files even if you have got newer files"

Agreed - After having time-problems anyway we should go your way...

> > ---> After-boot:
> > Installing Netkit-base
> > 	Perhaps there are other etc.sample-files that can be used -
> > 	e.g. hosts for non-network-machines...
> I believe the book already says that...checking....confirmed. They're not 
> strictly needed so not copied.

The hosts-file could be copied - I think it is needed (and we create it
later anyway) - if we copy it the "non-networking-guys" don't have to
create it later and the others just have to add a line...

> Perhaps LFS-2.4.3 will be bug free then ?;)

We'll see - the Athlon 800 is so fast while compiling I never got a
chance to read through the descriptions of the programs ;)

BTW - installation runs like in heaven - thanks for the great work,
Gerard and the lfs-community...

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