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