Pushing forward with Onward.

Justin Mattock justinmattock at gmail.com
Wed Jun 17 13:05:54 PDT 2009


On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 6:43 PM, robert baker<robertmbaker at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 1:09 PM, Robert
> Connolly<robert at linuxfromscratch.org> wrote:
>>
>> See if this patch helps:
>> http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewvc/devel/libcap/libcap-2.16-headerfix.patch?view=co
>
>
> I will give that a try tonight. I did find a patch created by the
> fedora team when I was going through this, but I don't know if that
> was it. The one I found did not fix the build failure. More on this
> after I escape work.
>
>
>>
>> LFS is using --with-installed-readline (system readline). There must be a way
>> to make it work.
>
> Ah. I missed the fact that they had moved up to bash-4.0 in the
> development version. I will dig into this tonight as well so I can
> figure out what is amiss with my readline installation. Thanks for the
> pointer.
>
>
>> I'm also working on glibc-2.10.1 patches. The existing patches have a couple
>> problems.
>>
>> I simplified the arc4random patch, using netbsd's arc4random.c ported to
>> linux. Made __arc4random_stir a weak alias so the internal version is always
>> used, and so it never conflicts with a function in the application or another
>> library. I'm figuring out a test suite for arc4random() just to see that it
>> works.
>>
>> The mktemp_urandom patch uses the wrong error number when /dev/urandom doesn't
>> exist.
>>
>> Fixed mkstemps to use /dev/urandom. I found a test suite from INN (the news
>> daemon).
>>
>> Made strlcat/strlcpy non-static, so they're in the shared library. This will
>> break binary compatibility with other distributions. I found a test suite
>> from INN.
>>
>> Some of the patches were using read(), instead of __read(). Fixed that.
>
> I am eager to get my hands on your work for the next go around. I was
> more or less concerned about getting a grasp on test suite failures
> throughout the book this last time around. Considering how clean
> things are with the tests I am very pleased with the direction things
> are going.
>
>
>> What's the view on upgrading GCC?
>>
>> robert
>>
>
> I am all for staying current so long as there are no breakages. I
> would be more than willing to do a test build with an upgraded GCC
> this next run through. Are you talking about moving up to GCC-4.4.0 or
> do you have another release in mind?
>
> Would you be interested in outlining any goals that you would like to
> see set for the "stable" revision of the book? I am absolutely
> interested in lending a hand wherever I can.
>
> Robert Baker
> --
> http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/hlfs-dev
> FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
> Unsubscribe: See the above information page
>


Hey alright,
libcap patch went in perfectly, and
compiled perfectly.
libc(latest git) compiled perfectly,
and installed.

Thanks for the patch.

-- 
Justin P. Mattock



More information about the hlfs-dev mailing list