Patch to fix BZ #1597

Randy McMurchy LFS-User at
Thu Aug 4 11:11:15 PDT 2005

Matthew Burgess wrote these words on 08/04/05 13:01 CST:
> Randy McMurchy wrote:
>>+<para>If you wish to run the test suite for Module-Init-Tools, download the 
>>+separate tarball and unpack it along with the source tarball.
> What tarball?  Now, as it's optional, do we link to it from 
> chapter03/packages.html or do we just put a {ulink} in this paragraph?

Well, I thought about that, but because the version number of the
testsuite tarball and the source tarball are the same (unlike the
Bash tarball and the Bash Docs tarball) and the fact they are
downloaded from the same directory (pointed to from chapter03/packages),
I wasn't sure it would be necessary.

You make that call.

> Aside from that minor query, it looks great.
> Incidentally, in Tush's original report he mentioned that "Additionally, 
> running make check messes up the built executables".  2 questions 
> related to that then:
> 1. What exactly is "messed up" about them? and
> 2. Are they similarly messed up in the most recent pre-release?

I don't have answers to either question. Perhaps Tush will provide
these details. I simply followed his instructions (adding the
touching of the file, as well) and drove on without even thinking
about the whys of what he mentioned.


rmlscsi: [GNU ld version 20041220] [gcc (GCC) 3.4.3]
[GNU C Library stable release version 2.3.4] [Linux 2.6.10 i686]
13:05:01 up 124 days, 12:38, 2 users, load average: 1.02, 0.68, 0.33

More information about the lfs-dev mailing list