lfs-discuss Digest V1 #35

lfs-discuss at linuxfromscratch.org lfs-discuss at linuxfromscratch.org
Sat Oct 28 21:00:01 PDT 2000


lfs-discuss Digest	Sat, 28 Oct 2000	Volume: 01  Issue: 035

In This Issue:
		Re: Static gcc compile prob
		Re: Introductions
		Re: Bad link
		Re: Static gcc compile prob
		Re: Static gcc compile prob
		Re: Static gcc compile prob
		Re: Bad link
		Re: Introductions
		Re: Bad link
		Re: Balu's 2.4.2 post-chroot
		Re: Bad link
		Re: Bad link
		Re: Static gcc compile prob
		Re: Static gcc compile prob
		tar man pages on lfs-system
		Re: Static gcc compile prob
		Re: Bad link
		Re: Introductions
		Re: Bad link
		Re: Introductions
		Re: Introductions
		unsubscribe
		Re: Bad link
		Re: unsubscribe
		Re: unsubscribe
		Re: Static gcc compile prob
		Re: Static gcc compile prob
		Re: Static gcc compile prob

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Jeffery McLean <jeffery at meowpawjects.com>
Subject: Re: Static gcc compile prob
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 20:37:42 -0700

On Fri, 27 Oct 2000, you wrote:
> Wait a minute, here... just wait a minute, are we talking about the same
> project here?

Yes

> Debian took _forever_ to move to glibc 2.1.3, i seriously hope there not
> hoping on using an developers release (or snapshot) of glibc in
> there unstable branch, i wonder how they managed to convince everyone on
> that ;)

Debian was in frease for WAY to long the last time
And part of the problem was to much good stuff was comming out just
after they froze so they would unfreaze just long enough to include
the new software.

> > However RedHat is starting to generate a name for themselfs in the
> > crashy/unstable os area.
> Oh, about since after 6.0 ;)

I've not had much problems with 6.0...  7.0 sends shivers up my spine...

> > and finnally it looks like RedHat may not be working with the
> > community anymore.. 

> RH stopped working with the community once they hit the IPO, it's been
> down hill (actually even before) since then.

Gezz... I feel sorry for AC now... (The guy at RedHat who
makes changes to the Linux Kernel and gives it back to
the community)
Some see him as below Linus on the kernel...
I guess RedHat will really hurt this standing in the community...

> As for M$ and Corel... i'm sorry Cowpland left Corel, no matter what
> someone will say about it, he did bring Ottawa (really, if you know the
> history behind it) to where it is now,  M$ buying into the company
> now, this doesn't surpise me, too bad Inprise and Corel didn't
> merged, they could have had some serious potentional.

I liked Cowpland.. Ego and all....  Reminds me of someone I know
[looks in mirror]

> Corel was fucked wayyyy before they got involved with Linux, some would
> say getting involved with Linux actually has saved the company so far,

I agree.. people blame Corels problems on Linux but...
Corel Draw, Word Perfict.. this is Corel..
Those titles really faded into obvivion...
Corel is dead on the Windows platform..
I'd hope other companys folowed Corels example...
(And I suspect Microsoft is conserned about that)
Corel isn't the only company suffering on the WIndows platform...

> Mmm..Netwinders, Wordperfect, Corel Linux, etc

Netwinders are cool... I want one...
> > Well thank the gods for LFS...
> Nah, thx the gods we have the source code, as that matters more, LFS would
> not exists if we didn't have the source... =)

Yeah but then Linux would suck without source code..

Sill LFS.. so now I can build the OS from source code
and not have to deal with snapshots and other madness
(Unless I WANT to)

> Dunno... Bryan pointed out a Gratefull Dead song not too long ago, really
> described how the Distro's are going today, just a shame.

I know...

I want to make my own Linux system that installs from a web browser
(Waiting for the LFS destro thing to be done and use that
as the basis for my idea)

Just use that WIndows feature where it runs .exe files you click on.
Make a short .exe installer.. and go from there...

[It could be e-mailed to people but I'd think the startup screen
would be enough to keep it from accually "infecting" anyone]
-- 
http://www.meowpawjects.com/ Doing the impossible daily
Come see my projects and download my code. Open source all the way....


------------------------------

From: Gerard Beekmans <gerard at linuxfromscratch.org>
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 01:04:56 -0400
Subject: Re: Introductions

While we're at the nickname thing, I started IRC'ing in first year of 
College, so that would be september of 1998. I'm not sure what nick I startd 
using, it was probably something unimaginative as "Surfer" (as in 
web-surfer). Then some guy started leaving channels thinking I wasn't able to 
follow him (i wasn't that kind of irc newbie as he took me for) so I started 
following. In the middle of this cat&mouse game I changed my nick, for fun, 
to Chaser. I've used it ever since, right up to 3 months ago it was my 
username on my Linux systems and the name of my computer. Not sure when but I 
started getting tired of the nick after nearly 2.5 years so I changed my 
login name on Linux systems to 'gerard' and renamed my systems to characters 
from "The Lord of the Rings" book (gwaihir is my home-pc so to say, shadowfax 
is that was powers linuxfromscratch.org and my notebook, before it died, was 
called Hasufel).

In case anybody wonders about IRC and how addictive it can be: Yes, it can be 
very addictive. During my college days I spend most of my day on IRC (besides 
the regular chit-chats I frequented help channels and starting helping out. 
I've always had a passion to help people). So it was to no suprise that I met 
somebody on IRC from the opposite gender. After a year talking to here I 
started calling her on the phone even went all the way from Holland to Canada 
during Christmas of 1999 to visit her. Her maiden name is Beverly Pichler. 
Her current name is Mrs. Beverly Beekmans aka my beloved wife.

IRC romance works, I'm the living proof ;)

Ok so much for the muchy part. Want to know more about he-who-brings-you-LFS 
drop me a line and I'll be happy to answer more personal stuff ;) (yeah right 
as if anybody would care but hey gotto be your nice host and all that so the 
offer's open)

Cya, time to get some sleep



-- 
Gerard Beekmans
www.linuxfromscratch.org

-*- If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem -*-


------------------------------

From: Gerard Beekmans <gerard at linuxfromscratch.org>
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 01:07:50 -0400
Subject: Re: Bad link

> Anyway I didn't mean to say anyone else did.. just an offhanded comment
> [Ohh lets use a GUI html editor.. yeah..] then the fonts hide the fact that
> your lowercase eL is accually ONE or your zero is accually an upercase
> Oh]
>
> and a GUI IDE instead of a text editor for coding.. same issue...
> Ohh yeah I just love that pr1nt command and umode (OOO);
>
> Pritty good odds that most of you are VI people...
> I find pico a lot easyer (But again I don't use pine anymore)

Been there, done that. No more GUI HTML editors for me. 
linuxfromscratch.org's site is created from scratch using vim by Richard 
Stellingwerff (I'm still impressed how he was able to keep track of the table 
layers he implemented. Quite confusing but the result is great) and I'm 
vim'ing my way through it too.

I'm actually waiting for a vim-flamebait from Bryan (he's a pico guy all the 
way. He would almost issue a company-wide pico policy, banishing the use of 
vim (you better not Bryan! ;))

-- 
Gerard Beekmans
www.linuxfromscratch.org

-*- If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem -*-


------------------------------

From: Gerard Beekmans <gerard at linuxfromscratch.org>
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 01:15:18 -0400
Subject: Re: Static gcc compile prob

On October 27, 2000 06:59 pm, you wrote:
> I'm getting this same problem (gcc is 2.95.2 and glibc is 2.1.95, using
> Debian unstable (woody) release.) I've been working on finding a
> solution for a week now, and I've finally subscribed to this list and
> figured I'd give it a shot. My situation is, unfortunately, that I
> cannot downgrade my glibc from the beta version (if my version IS beta)
> or my system will break significantly. Is there a way I can install a
> stable version as an alternate library and compile gcc with that
> instead?

Installing a second Glibc in an alternate location to link gcc against will 
be a real hard thing to do. GCC will the have hard-coded the alternate Glibc 
path which doesn't exist in LFS unless you hack LFS to keep using that 
alternate path.

You have two options:
1) Install a stable Debian, or anything that runs a non-alpha or non-beta 
Glibc version. A quick RedHat 6 installation will do just that trick (or get 
Debian but that takes a bit longer to install)

2) This is the easiest solution (why i mention it last don't ask) is where 
our beloved Jesse Quee comes to the resque: he has a i386 LFS build online:

Point some browser at : http://highos.dhs.org/ALFS/ALFS-2.3.6_i386/usr/bin/ 
and grab the 'gcc' and 'g++' binaries.
Then go to http://highos.dhs.org/ALFS/ALFS-2.3.6_i386/usr/lib/ and grab the 
contents of the gcc-lib directory (this will be some 5 to 6 MB I estimate)

Look under http://highos.dhs.org/ALFS/ALFS-2.3.6_i386/usr/include to see what 
else you're missing (get g++ at least)

I think with those you pretty much copied a GCC installation. With a bit of 
luck it will even work ;)

Good luck,

-- 
Gerard Beekmans
www.linuxfromscratch.org

-*- If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem -*-


------------------------------

Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 01:34:12 -0400
From: Jonathan Eisenstein <jeisen at mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Static gcc compile prob

Okay, call me picky, but is can I get a gcc there that's for the step
I'm on? I'd rather skip as little as possible, so if I can just get the
static GCC it would be great. Doesn't static GCC by definition mean it
doesn't need any particular libc to use?

> Point some browser at : http://highos.dhs.org/ALFS/ALFS-2.3.6_i386/usr/bin/
> and grab the 'gcc' and 'g++' binaries.
> Then go to http://highos.dhs.org/ALFS/ALFS-2.3.6_i386/usr/lib/ and grab the
> contents of the gcc-lib directory (this will be some 5 to 6 MB I estimate)
> 
> Look under http://highos.dhs.org/ALFS/ALFS-2.3.6_i386/usr/include to see what
> else you're missing (get g++ at least)
> 
> I think with those you pretty much copied a GCC installation. With a bit of
> luck it will even work ;)
> 
> Good luck,
> 
> --
> Gerard Beekmans
> www.linuxfromscratch.org
>


------------------------------

Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 01:37:49 -0400
From: Jonathan Eisenstein <jeisen at mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Static gcc compile prob

Or, maybe something else I could do (just thought of this) is set the
system up so that I can chroot and use the different libc to compile a
static gcc. Is this possible/advised?

Jonathan Eisenstein wrote:
> 
> Okay, call me picky, but is can I get a gcc there that's for the step
> I'm on? I'd rather skip as little as possible, so if I can just get the
> static GCC it would be great. Doesn't static GCC by definition mean it
> doesn't need any particular libc to use?
> 
> > Point some browser at : http://highos.dhs.org/ALFS/ALFS-2.3.6_i386/usr/bin/
> > and grab the 'gcc' and 'g++' binaries.
> > Then go to http://highos.dhs.org/ALFS/ALFS-2.3.6_i386/usr/lib/ and grab the
> > contents of the gcc-lib directory (this will be some 5 to 6 MB I estimate)
> >
> > Look under http://highos.dhs.org/ALFS/ALFS-2.3.6_i386/usr/include to see what
> > else you're missing (get g++ at least)
> >
> > I think with those you pretty much copied a GCC installation. With a bit of
> > luck it will even work ;)
> >
> > Good luck,
> >
> > --
> > Gerard Beekmans
> > www.linuxfromscratch.org
> >
> 
> --
> Unsubscribe: send email to lfs-discuss-request at linuxfromscratch.org
> and put unsubscribe in the subject header of the message


------------------------------

From: Jeffery McLean <jeffery at meowpawjects.com>
Subject: Re: Bad link
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 22:41:12 -0700

On Fri, 27 Oct 2000, you wrote:
> I'm actually waiting for a vim-flamebait from Bryan (he's a pico guy all the 
> way. He would almost issue a company-wide pico policy, banishing the use of 
> vim (you better not Bryan! ;))

Ohh I'm a pico guy (Ok nano now but it's all the same)
so I'll flame...

'tee" must be tee   all is tee

[Despretly hopes people get the joke... tee is kinda like cat < filename]
I do like tee but only when I'm in "blind furry rant" mode
I need to go over it later in a text editor...
but in "blind furry rant" mode I'm not thinking about spelling (as if I ever do)
or style or anything but getting words out of brain onto keyboard...
-- 
http://www.meowpawjects.com/ Doing the impossible daily
Come see my projects and download my code. Open source all the way....


------------------------------

From: Jeffery McLean <jeffery at meowpawjects.com>
Subject: Re: Introductions
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2000 22:47:39 -0700

On Fri, 27 Oct 2000, you wrote:
> In case anybody wonders about IRC and how addictive it can be:

My intoduction to on-line chat was POPnet a local on-line chat system.
I've been an addict every sence....

That was like 1982...
I saw Unix and my 3B2 (AT&T unix box) with 4 ports and said "Chat server"
I never got the phone lines or modems for it.. 
Internet and said "good place for a chat system"
IRC... unix source code...  and there was no hope of me ever using Windows...

Thus I have accually avoided the evil Microsoft
>From 3B2 to Sun (SunOs) to Xenix (Microsoft Unix)
to Linux....
-- 
http://www.meowpawjects.com/ Doing the impossible daily
Come see my projects and download my code. Open source all the way....


------------------------------

From: "Matthias Benkmann" <mbenkmann at gmx.de>
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 11:04:37 +0200
Subject: Re: Bad link

> I'm actually waiting for a vim-flamebait from Bryan (he's a pico guy all the 
> way. He would almost issue a company-wide pico policy, banishing the use of 
> vim (you better not Bryan! ;))

Doesn't anybody here use Joe?  The first text editor I ever used (not 
counting the BASIC mode of my 8-Bit MSX) was the ancient WordStar on a 286 
and then I moved to the Borland IDEs which are similar to WordStar and now 
I use Joe which is similar to WordStar. I just wish I knew why Joe 
misbehaves when I start it in kvt the 2nd time. 

MSB

----
This sentence no verb.



------------------------------

From: Erika Pacholleck <Pacholleck.E at gmx.de>
Subject: Re: Balu's 2.4.2 post-chroot
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 08:47:36 +0200

( Fre, 27 Okt 2000 ) Thomas 'Balu' Walter <-- :
> 
> As I said before I will try to contact glibc-developers and ask for
> help.

( Mit, 25 Okt 2000 ) Erika Pacholleck <-- :
> I am working on a foreign language for lfs explanation
> to get the whole stuff cleared.

So, there is no need to continue.

Erika


------------------------------

Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 09:08:34 -0400
From: Jonathan Eisenstein <jeisen at mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Bad link

Yep, and I never used WordStar.

> Doesn't anybody here use Joe?


------------------------------

From: Jeffery McLean <jeffery at meowpawjects.com>
Subject: Re: Bad link
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 06:08:29 -0700

On Sat, 28 Oct 2000, you wrote:
> Doesn't anybody here use Joe?  The first text editor I ever used (not 
> counting the BASIC mode of my 8-Bit MSX) was the ancient WordStar on a 286 

I wouldn't count any BASIC as a text editor becouse it dosn't
load or save text it loads and saves Basic programs

I wouldn't count WordStar as a text editor becouse it was designed
to be a wordprocessor and really is a very bad example for
a text editor.

I wouldn't use Joe.. he dosn't like to be used.. (unless maybe as a sex
toy by a sexy lady)
--
http://www.meowpawjects.com/ Doing the impossible daily
Come see my projects and download my code. Open source all the way....


------------------------------

From: Gerard Beekmans <gerard at linuxfromscratch.org>
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 12:28:58 -0400
Subject: Re: Static gcc compile prob

On October 28, 2000 01:34 am, you wrote:
> Okay, call me picky, but is can I get a gcc there that's for the step
> I'm on? I'd rather skip as little as possible, so if I can just get the
> static GCC it would be great. Doesn't static GCC by definition mean it
> doesn't need any particular libc to use?

Yes, static GCC doesn't depend on libraries. And I also just realized that 
the URL's I gave you yesterday aren't from a static build.

If you want I can build a static GCC for you on shadowfax, bzip2 it for you 
to download. All you need to do it unpack the gcc-build directory and run 
"make install" with the proper paramaters from the book on it.

Or you can install  a stable distro and do it yourself. Let me know what's 
best for you

-- 
Gerard Beekmans
www.linuxfromscratch.org

-*- If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem -*-


------------------------------

From: Gerard Beekmans <gerard at linuxfromscratch.org>
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 12:29:49 -0400
Subject: Re: Static gcc compile prob

On October 28, 2000 01:37 am, you wrote:
> Or, maybe something else I could do (just thought of this) is set the
> system up so that I can chroot and use the different libc to compile a
> static gcc. Is this possible/advised?

That's actually exactly what is going to happen. But in order to compile a 
new compiler inside chroot you need a compiler to start with. That would be 
the static gcc you create in chapter 5. You're going to need it, there's no 
way around it I'm afraid.



-- 
Gerard Beekmans
www.linuxfromscratch.org

-*- If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem -*-


------------------------------

From: Lukas Gruber <gruber at 3c.via.at>
Subject: tar man pages on lfs-system
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 18:27:25 +0200


hi list,

when i enter a "man tar" to my new lfs it says that there are no man pages
for it.
i dont need them that much - my normal system has them - but this confuses
my a bit.
did i do something wrong when i installed tar? installation was copy-paste
....

TIA


------------------------------

Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 13:09:21 -0400
From: Jonathan Eisenstein <jeisen at mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Static gcc compile prob

I would absolutely appreciate if you could build me a static gcc to
download (and knowing how long the compilations take, I appreciate it
even more). Unfortunately, I have very limited space and can't install a
stable distro without losing my current one.

Gerard Beekmans wrote:
> 
> On October 28, 2000 01:34 am, you wrote:
> > Okay, call me picky, but is can I get a gcc there that's for the step
> > I'm on? I'd rather skip as little as possible, so if I can just get the
> > static GCC it would be great. Doesn't static GCC by definition mean it
> > doesn't need any particular libc to use?
> 
> Yes, static GCC doesn't depend on libraries. And I also just realized that
> the URL's I gave you yesterday aren't from a static build.
> 
> If you want I can build a static GCC for you on shadowfax, bzip2 it for you
> to download. All you need to do it unpack the gcc-build directory and run
> "make install" with the proper paramaters from the book on it.
> 
> Or you can install  a stable distro and do it yourself. Let me know what's
> best for you
> 
> --
> Gerard Beekmans
> www.linuxfromscratch.org
> 
> -*- If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem -*-
> 
> --
> Unsubscribe: send email to lfs-discuss-request at linuxfromscratch.org
> and put unsubscribe in the subject header of the message


------------------------------

Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 19:48:25 +0100
From: richard at reika.demon.co.uk
Subject: Re: Bad link

Misquoted from Matthias Benkmann on Sat, Oct 28, 2000 at 11:04:37AM +0200:
> 
> Doesn't anybody here use Joe?  The first text editor I ever used (not 
> counting the BASIC mode of my 8-Bit MSX) was the ancient WordStar on a 286 
> and then I moved to the Borland IDEs which are similar to WordStar and now 
> I use Joe which is similar to WordStar. I just wish I knew why Joe 
> misbehaves when I start it in kvt the 2nd time. 
> 

I like joe, but I have not yet convinced it to use all of my 128x48
text console.

Richard
I know there is an easier way, that way would not be so much fun.


------------------------------

Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 21:27:12 +0200
From: Fabio Fracassi <f.fracassi at gmx.net>
Subject: Re: Introductions

Hi,

I am 21 and study computer since in Bonn, Germany.
I stumbled over linux about 3 or 4 Years ago, and since about
1 Year I use it as my prime OS. Since I always wanted to know
exactly what's hapening inside my computer, gerard got me as soon
as I read the Title of his HOWTO.

In chat I use Turiya, a deamon from S. Donaldsons Cronicles of T.
Covernant.
As I read many of you are also interested in Fantasy, if so this book
is for you.

Fabio


------------------------------

From: "Matthias Benkmann" <mbenkmann at gmx.de>
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 21:27:44 +0200
Subject: Re: Bad link

> I wouldn't count WordStar as a text editor becouse it was designed
> to be a wordprocessor and really is a very bad example for
> a text editor.

Which version are you talking about?
The ancient version I used in 286 times did not even have a print preview 
and its files were just plain ASCII. It was definitely a text editor.
 
> I wouldn't use Joe.. he dosn't like to be used.. (unless maybe as a sex
> toy by a sexy lady)

Reminds me of vi. You know, vi is like a dominatrix. If you want to 
insert, you have to give up control :-)

MSB

----
An army of sheep led by a lion
is stronger than an army of lions
led by a sheep.



------------------------------

From: Erika Pacholleck <Pacholleck.E at gmx.de>
Subject: Re: Introductions
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 21:37:02 +0200

( Sam, 28 Okt 2000 ) Fabio Fracassi <-- :
> Hi,
> In chat I use Turiya, a deamon from S. Donaldsons Cronicles of T.
> Covernant.

If you run into TomCov, you got me
Btw. are there more than 2nd cronicals, book 3 (was the last I got)

Erika


------------------------------

Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 21:50:49 +0200
From: Fabio Fracassi <f.fracassi at gmx.net>
Subject: Re: Introductions

Erika Pacholleck wrote:
> 
> ( Sam, 28 Okt 2000 ) Fabio Fracassi <-- :
> > Hi,
> > In chat I use Turiya, a deamon from S. Donaldsons Cronicles of T.
> > Covernant.
> 
> If you run into TomCov, you got me
> Btw. are there more than 2nd cronicals, book 3 (was the last I got)
> 
> Erika
> 
> --
> Unsubscribe: send email to lfs-discuss-request at linuxfromscratch.org
> and put unsubscribe in the subject header of the message
That's what I read, too. Dunno if there are more,
but I don't think so.

Fabio


------------------------------

Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 19:39:41 +0000
From: Larry Coleman <larryliberty13 at home.com>
Subject: unsubscribe

 


------------------------------

From: Jeffery McLean <jeffery at meowpawjects.com>
Subject: Re: Bad link
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 00:25:23 +0000

On Sat, 28 Oct 2000, you wrote:
> > I wouldn't count WordStar as a text editor becouse it was designed
> > to be a wordprocessor and really is a very bad example for
> > a text editor.
> 
> Which version are you talking about?
> The ancient version I used in 286 times did not even have a print preview 
> and its files were just plain ASCII. It was definitely a text editor.

CP/M version (older version) saved as text but added control carricters
that really messed things up..
But if you refrained for using those features then WordStar could make
an ok text editor...

Preview wouldn't have been of any use on CP/M
CP/M uses terminals like VT 100 for a display and has absolutly no
graphics support (unless you use a graphic terminal.. and those
were usually connected to super computers not CP/M boxes)

Also printers were diffrent enough that WordStar couldn't
accurately predict the results.
Also vareations of page sizes made WordStar not work like it should.

WordStar is kinda a CP/M thing... ported to Dos so everyone
could have the populare wordprocessor on Dos...

By the time the 286 came out it was kinda old... :)

I've used other really nice wordprocessors that
also saved as text and didn't have a preview option...
But they still make really bad text editors...
-- 
http://www.meowpawjects.com/ Doing the impossible daily
Come see my projects and download my code. Open source all the way....


------------------------------

From: Jeffery McLean <jeffery at meowpawjects.com>
Subject: Re: unsubscribe
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 17:35:56 +0000

On Sat, 28 Oct 2000, you wrote:
> -- 
> Unsubscribe: send email to lfs-discuss-request at linuxfromscratch.org
> and put unsubscribe in the subject header of the message

Is it just me or are thies unsubscribe e-mails just to irronic for words?

I love irrony..  with a few execptions...
-- 
http://www.meowpawjects.com/ Doing the impossible daily
Come see my projects and download my code. Open source all the way....


------------------------------

Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 12:12:07 +1100 (EST)
From: Brett <generica at email.com>
Subject: Re: unsubscribe


If only someone misspelling "irony" was ironic,
then this would be even more funny,
however, it isn't...

	/ Brett

On Sat, 28 Oct 2000, Jeffery McLean wrote:
>
> On Sat, 28 Oct 2000, you wrote:
> > -- 
> > Unsubscribe: send email to lfs-discuss-request at linuxfromscratch.org
> > and put unsubscribe in the subject header of the message
> 
> Is it just me or are thies unsubscribe e-mails just to irronic for words?
> 
> I love irrony..  with a few execptions...
> 



------------------------------

Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 20:48:20 -0400
From: Jesse Tie Ten Quee <highos at highos.com>
Subject: Re: Static gcc compile prob

Yo,

On Sat, Oct 28, 2000 at 12:29:49PM -0400, Gerard Beekmans wrote:
> That's actually exactly what is going to happen. But in order to compile a 
> new compiler inside chroot you need a compiler to start with. That would be 
> the static gcc you create in chapter 5. You're going to need it, there's no 
> way around it I'm afraid.

http://quasar.highos.com/ALFS/archive/LFS-static_2.3.6_i386.tar.gz

Is everything you need to enter chroot, you could download that, unpack
it and chroot and your set. (btw i can unpack it in /ALFS if you want,
or like Ger mentioned you can just wait for a static GCC :)

Or.. i could make a static Gcc, shadowfax....would take a while for it
todo ('little 233/64MB going at it, compared to my beast :)

-
Jesse Tie Ten Quee - highos at highos dot com


------------------------------

Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 22:10:29 -0400
From: Jonathan Eisenstein <jeisen at mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Static gcc compile prob

Wow, this is one of the most supportive communities I've ever been a
part of, and I'm feeling like I'm just rejecting all the help you offer!
;) Yeah, I'd rather get just a static GCC (in fact, if I figured it
would make a difference, I'd get someone else's static GCC and compile
one for myself... don't worry, I've decided against that...) Besides, on
a 28.8 modem? The download would take longer than either one of those
machines compiling it! :)

(BTW, you say it's a 'little 233/64MB' machine? I'm going at it with
what must be a miniscule 120/48MB)

> 
> Or.. i could make a static Gcc, shadowfax....would take a while for it
> todo ('little 233/64MB going at it, compared to my beast :)
>


------------------------------

Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2000 21:11:53 -0400
From: Jesse Tie Ten Quee <highos at highos.com>
Subject: Re: Static gcc compile prob

Yo,

On Sat, Oct 28, 2000 at 10:10:29PM -0400, Jonathan Eisenstein wrote:
> Wow, this is one of the most supportive communities I've ever been a
> part of, and I'm feeling like I'm just rejecting all the help you offer!
<snip />

Nah, totally understandable ;)

> (BTW, you say it's a 'little 233/64MB' machine? I'm going at it with
> what must be a miniscule 120/48MB)

It is, compared to my server (http://quasar.highos.com/misc/server.txt)
allthough shadowfax has been doing an excellent job so far ;)

-
Jesse Tie Ten Quee - highos at highos dot com


------------------------------

End of lfs-discuss Digest V1 #35
********************************




More information about the lfs-dev mailing list