FYI - The current SVN is broke due to changes in the headers. Will be concluding my tests today to get it working again. For those who use the headers script and roll your own headers. Here is the list of the missing headers, will be updating this as I find them. if_link.h (New 2.6.19)
The CLFS Development team is pleased to announce the fourth release candidate of CLFS-1.0.0, code-name "Bender". This test release features Glibc 2.4, GCC 4.1.1, Binutils 2.17, and supports the x86, x86-64, sparc, powerpc, ppc64, mips, mips64, and alpha, including multilib on those arch's that support it. Cross-building is also supported, even from non-Linux host systems such as Solaris, *BSD, and OS X. The developers encourage wide testing of the CLFS build on as many archs as possible, proofreading of the text, and any other suggestions. Please open tickets in the Trac system at http://trac.cross-lfs.org for any problems found, so we may address them. You may view the book online at: http://cross-lfs.org/view/1.0.0rc4/ and downloadable versions are available for most arch's at: http://cross-lfs.org/files/BOOK/1.0.0rc4/ This release is tagged in SVN at the following location, if you wish to render it yourself: http://svn.cross-lfs.org/svn/repos/cross-lfs/tags/1.0.0rc4 With this release, we've decided to go ahead and cut a 1.0 branch. Developers, please make sure all commits targeted for 1.0.0 are checked into the clfs-1.0 branch:(Continue reading)
Currently, LFS ticket 1765, http://wiki.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/ticket/1765, suggests that LFS use the licenses that are currently in the BLFS book. Jim, Ryan, and I have had some off-line conversations about this and feel it is time to open up this discussion to the community. Currently, LFS, HLFS, and Cross-LFS have the same license. This license is "home grown" and has not been vetted by anyone knowledgeable in the law. BLFS went to a dual license format some time ago using a Creative Commons License, http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/cvs/appendices/creat-comm.html, for the book while simultaneously providing a Academic Free License, http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/cvs/appendices/ac-free-lic.html, for the code. Jim has pointed out that there are problems with the CC: http://people.debian.org/~evan/ccsummary http://www.satn.org/archive/2003_04_27_archive.html http://zesty.ca/cc.html He and Ryan are proposing the Open Publication License, http://www.opencontent.org/openpub, for all the books. I've looked at it and it seems to meet the standards of having a recognized license and protecting the books. If it is the community's decision, I have no problem with using this in BLFS. It is used by several organizations including: Linux Gazzette http://linuxgazette.net/copying.html Debian http://www.debian.org/opl(Continue reading)
LFS 6.2-pre3 is now available at http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/6.2/ It is in svn as tags/6.2-pre3/ Outstanding issues: 1. MD5SUMS for udev-config-6.2-pre3.tar.bz2 and lfs-bootscripts-6.2-pre3.tar.bz2 need to be updated. 2. Possible text changes concerning udev testing (Ticket 1846) 3. Updates to vim patches for bug fixes/enhancements. (Ticket 1843) -- Bruce -- -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/alfs-discuss FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
The CLFS Development team is pleased to announce the third release candidate of CLFS-1.0.0, code-name "Bender". This test release features Glibc 2.4, GCC 4.1.1, Binutils 2.17, and supports the x86, x86-64, sparc, powerpc, ppc64, mips, mips64, and alpha, including multilib on those arch's that support it. Cross-building is also supported, even from non-Linux host systems such as Solaris, *BSD, and OS X. The developers encourage wide testing of the CLFS build on as many archs as possible, proofreading of the text, and any other suggestions. Please open tickets in the Trac system at http://trac.cross-lfs.org for any problems found, so we may address them. You may view the book online at: http://cross-lfs.org/view/1.0.0rc3/ and downloadable versions are available for most arch's at: http://cross-lfs.org/files/BOOK/1.0.0rc3/ This release is tagged in SVN at the following location, if you wish to render it yourself: http://svn.cross-lfs.org/svn/repos/cross-lfs/tags/1.0.0rc3 Jeremy CLFS 1.x release manager(Continue reading)
The Linux From Scratch community is pleased to announce the second pre-release of LFS 6.2. This release provides several updated to the -pre1 release. It includes several minor textual changes and updates patches to vim and grub. It also includes an update to Linix-2.6.16.27. This being a test release, we would appreciate you taking the time to try it out and report any bugs you find in it to the LFS development team at lfs-dev <at> linuxfromscratch.org. Bruce Dubbs LFS 6.2 Release Manager -- -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Hey guys just wanted to let you know I posted the question about the current headers in 2.6.18, how there are still some unresolved issues. For those who are interested, here's the link to the email. http://lkml.org/lkml/2006/7/11/562 -- -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
robert <at> linuxfromscratch.org wrote these words in the HLFS-Book mailing list on 07/02/06 14:18 CST: > Date: 2006-07-02 13:18:42 -0600 (Sun, 02 Jul 2006) > New Revision: 664 > Add sed command to coreutils chapter 6 to fix overflow in the 'who' command (Redhat bug #158405). Would this be applicable to the other LFS branches as well? -- Randy rmlscsi: [bogomips 1003.27] [GNU ld version 2.16.1] [gcc (GCC) 4.0.3] [GNU C Library stable release version 2.3.6] [Linux 2.6.14.3 i686] 14:23:00 up 51 days, 6:23, 1 user, load average: 0.15, 0.38, 0.50 -- -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Package freeze is now in effect.
Any other packages need updating need to be justified, unless
it's a bug fix.
Packages excluded from the freeze are Binutils, Bootscripts, Headers,
Linux, and Udev Rules. (If the new packages become available soon)
Binutils 2.17 and Linux 2.6.17 are our targets for this release,
If Linux 2.6.17 doesn't get released soon, we will keep 2.6.16 in.
I have added another 2 weeks to get the text updated properly, we
need to make sure the book flows well.
We will also need to create a working branch for the current 1.0
so that we can keep the trunk up to date with all the updates to
make 1.1
a quicker release.
Testsuites.
We need to have a discussion on where people should pull
there gcc information from, because every architecture is going to be
different and very hard to maintain. Any suggestions here.
SVN Changes.
I'm also going to move Ryan's scripts into a separate repo. But I
would also
like to move the various scripts that all of use have created into
this new repo
as well. I know Joe and I have such a build system. I will talk with
Justin
(Continue reading)
OK, we're coming close to release time for CLFS 1.0. I'm aware we're waiting on the new Binutils 2.17, but I'd like to propose that we go into a version freeze right now for all but 2 things: 1) Binutils 2.17 2) Further stable releases in the 2.6.16.x kernel tree. This way, we can start to really flesh things out, without the worry of constant package upgrades, and prepare ourselves for the 1.0 release. I'd like to propose a target CLFS 1.0 release date of June 30, with an RC1 coming within a few days of the binutils 2.17 release. I think this is very doable. Second proposal will be a little more controversial, but I think it warrants serious consideration. We all know that by the time a new release of a book is made, the previous one is quite stale. So, I'd like to see a "release manager" nominated for the 1.0 series, who's sole purpose would be to take incremental updates of non-toolchain packages, and incorporate them into the stable tree where it's possible. Any updates like this should be cases where no substantial build changes are necessary in the book. Update releases would be done regularly ( I was thinking monthly), and since the changes would be so minor, there wouldn't need to be much testing. This doesn't have to be a permanent thing either - I propose we try it for the 1.0 release, then revisit it for CLFS 2.0 to determine if it was really useful and should continue. What you guys think? Jeremy(Continue reading)
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat | Sun |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | ||
| 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 |
| 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 |
| 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 |
RSS Feed1 | |
|---|---|
6 | |
5 | |
5 | |
5 | |
8 | |
206 | |
341 | |
463 | |
503 |