Unstable profile status?

jeremy at vulcan.internal.jutley.org jeremy at vulcan.internal.jutley.org
Mon May 24 00:32:59 PDT 2004


On 2004-05-24, jeremy at vulcan.internal.jutley.org <jeremy at vulcan.internal.jutley.org> wrote:
> On 2004-05-24, Kevin P. Fleming <kpfleming at linuxfromscratch.org> wrote:
>> jeremy at vulcan.internal.jutley.org wrote:
>>
>>> Well, it was definately a few days behind.  Still had GCC 3.4.0, instead of the
>>> 3.4.1-pre CVS tarball, and the HJL binutils instead of the FSF final release.
>>> 
>>> But, I'll work with it :)
>>
>> Hmm, that should not have been true, I updated the profile myself to 
>> include those and thought I had committed them to the server. I've even 
>> run multiple builds from that profile... Just checked, my commits went 
>> in on 5/20, and I updated the version entity to match.
>>
>> Jeremy, where did you see an unstable profile that didn't have gcc-3.4.1?
>
> On my mirror:
>
> http://lfs.linux-phreak.net/alfs/downloads/profiles/unstable/profile-LFS-unstable.tar.bz2
>
> Although I think i know what's up now.  The LFS website hasn't undergone it's
> daily regeneration yet, so the timestamp that triggers rsync hasn't updated,
> so the tarball you put on the server today hasn't propogated to the mirrors
> yet.
>
> I'll grab the new tarball directly from Belgarath, and work from that.
>
> -J-


Oh, and you're going to HATE this, Kevin.  The profile-LFS-unstable.tar.bz2
that's currently on belgarath appears to be CVS of February 1st :(  It
appears to still reference binutils-2.14.

-J-



More information about the alfs-discuss mailing list