devil-linux-develop Mailing List for Devil-Linux (Page 41)

I like it, then we don't have to download that huge kernel tarball every
time.
It may also work if you use the $KERNELVERSION variable (may be spelled a
little different) for the filename, then we don't need the separate
folder.
Something like:
bzcat $DL_DIR/srv/patch-$KERNELVERSION.bz2 | patch -p1 || exit 1

Heiko

On Fri, November 30, 2007 14:23, Serge Leschinsky wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> please tell me your opinion about the following change:
>
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvsroot/devil-linux/build/scripts/prepare,v
> retrieving revision 1.69 diff -u -r1.69 prepare --- scripts/prepare     22
> Oct 2007 14:08:51 -0000      1.69
> +++ scripts/prepare     29 Nov 2007 14:48:14 -0000
> @@ -39,6 +39,16 @@
> echo "please remove or rename it" exit 1 fi +
> +       pushd $KERNELDIR > /dev/null
> +       if [ ! -f .minor_version_patch.done ]; then
> +           for i in $(ls -1 ../../src/kernel-minor-patch/*)
> +           do
> +               bzcat $i | patch -p1 || exit 1
> +           done
> +       touch .minor_version_patch.done
> +       popd > /dev/null
> +       fi
>
>
> # let's find out if we force the usage of old kernel include files
> # this is sometimes necessary, when they change too much in the new kernel
>  ===================================================================
>
>
> from my environment: src/kernel-minor-patch/patch-2.6.23.9.bz2
> src/linux-2.6.23.tar.bz2
>
> the ISO file was created successfully.


-- 

Regards
  Heiko Zuerker
  http://www.devil-linux.org

Hi,

please tell me your opinion about the following change:

===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/devil-linux/build/scripts/prepare,v
retrieving revision 1.69
diff -u -r1.69 prepare
--- scripts/prepare     22 Oct 2007 14:08:51 -0000      1.69
+++ scripts/prepare     29 Nov 2007 14:48:14 -0000
@@ -39,6 +39,16 @@
            echo "please remove or rename it"
            exit 1
        fi
+
+       pushd $KERNELDIR > /dev/null
+       if [ ! -f .minor_version_patch.done ]; then
+           for i in $(ls -1 ../../src/kernel-minor-patch/*)
+           do
+               bzcat $i | patch -p1 || exit 1
+           done
+       touch .minor_version_patch.done
+       popd > /dev/null
+       fi

        # let's find out if we force the usage of old kernel include files
        # this is sometimes necessary, when they change too much in the new kernel
===================================================================

from my environment:
src/kernel-minor-patch/patch-2.6.23.9.bz2
src/linux-2.6.23.tar.bz2

the ISO file was created successfully.

--
Sincerely,
Serge Leschinsky

Heiko Zuerker wrote:
> 
> 
> Did you enable Python after you already had a compile running?
> If yes, you may need to delete the file tmp/.done_build_Python and do
> another "make build".
> The Python build script takes care of the compilation and installation
> into the LFS system.
> 
> 

Indeed that was it.  Thank you!

-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Missing-python-in-lfssystem-tf4724388.html#a14027432
Sent from the devil-linux-develop mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

On Wed, November 28, 2007 16:39, bldrdash wrote:
>> Simply selecting Python in "make menuconfig" will resolve this issue.
>> Or
>> just edit the .config file directly and make sure you got
>> CONFIG_PYTHON=y
>>
>>
>>
>
> I'm attempting to build 1.2 for the first time and am having the same
> problem; python is not in the lfssystem. Python is selected in "make
> menuconfig" and I've verified CONFIG=PYTHON=y in the .config.
>
> I'm new to DL and LFS (but experienced in other distros and compiling
> from source), but it seems to me that this option would compile python for
> the disto, but not the chrooted environment.  Looks like jailkit requires
> python in order to build the package.
>
> I tried going into build\tmp\Python-2.4.4 and doing a ./configure, make
> install in the hope it would install to my chrooted environment... but it
> failed.
>
> My environment is:
> lfssystem-cvs-20030127-i486-stripped.tar.bz2 cvs
> ...@devil-linux.cvs.sourceforge.net:/cvsroot/devil-linux co -r
> rel-1-2-patches build cvs update -d -P
>
> Any suggestions?

Did you enable Python after you already had a compile running?
If yes, you may need to delete the file tmp/.done_build_Python and do
another "make build".
The Python build script takes care of the compilation and installation
into the LFS system.

-- 

Regards
  Heiko Zuerker
  http://www.devil-linux.org

Heiko Zuerker wrote:
> 
> 
> Simply selecting Python in "make menuconfig" will resolve this issue. Or
> just edit the .config file directly and make sure you got CONFIG_PYTHON=y
> 
> 

I'm attempting to build 1.2 for the first time and am having the same
problem; python is not in the lfssystem. Python is selected in "make
menuconfig" and I've verified CONFIG=PYTHON=y in the .config.

I'm new to DL and LFS (but experienced in other distros and compiling from
source), but it seems to me that this option would compile python for the
disto, but not the chrooted environment.  Looks like jailkit requires python
in order to build the package.

I tried going into build\tmp\Python-2.4.4 and doing a ./configure, make
install in the hope it would install to my chrooted environment... but it
failed.

My environment is:
lfssystem-cvs-20030127-i486-stripped.tar.bz2
cvs ...@devil-linux.cvs.sourceforge.net:/cvsroot/devil-linux co -r
rel-1-2-patches build
cvs update -d -P

Any suggestions?

-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Missing-python-in-lfssystem-tf4724388.html#a14012904
Sent from the devil-linux-develop mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

> >> Compare the new and the old patch, they probably removed a lot we want
> >> in there. Worst case you need to extract the missing old patches and put
> >> them into the src/pom-addon folder.
> >
> > Even in DL 1.3?
> 
> Oh no, you can upgrade patch-o-matic-ng in 1.3.
> Since we're already on the latest kernel it is not a problem.

I compared the two, and they are exactly the same, even though the bz2
files are different sizes (weird - I guess they used a different
compression option on bzip2).

 - BS

On Tue, November 27, 2007 08:53, Bruce Smith wrote:
>>> Is there anything special that needs to be done to upgrade
>>> patch-o-matic-ng?  I updated the src:
>>> patch-o-matic-ng-20071125.tar.bz2. Is there anything else that needs
>>> to be done?  (DL 1.3)
>>>
>>> I was having a problem with iptables and Apache/PHP, and updated
>>> libnetfilter_conntrack, php, and patch-o-matic-ng to the latest.
>>>
>>> While it was compiling, I figured out the real problem, which is NOT
>>> related to anything in DL (long story).
>>>
>>> If the compile completes, should I upload all three updates anyway?
>>>
>>
>> Unfortunately they keep removing patches from patch-o-matic-ng , once
>> they make it into the mainstream 2.6 kernel.
>
> But I'm only doing this on DL 1.3 w/2.6 kernel.
>
>
>> Compare the new and the old patch, they probably removed a lot we want
>> in there. Worst case you need to extract the missing old patches and put
>> them into the src/pom-addon folder.
>
> Even in DL 1.3?

Oh no, you can upgrade patch-o-matic-ng in 1.3.
Since we're already on the latest kernel it is not a problem.


-- 

Regards
  Heiko Zuerker
  http://www.devil-linux.org

> > Is there anything special that needs to be done to upgrade
> > patch-o-matic-ng?  I updated the src: patch-o-matic-ng-20071125.tar.bz2. Is
> > there anything else that needs to be done?  (DL 1.3)
> >
> > I was having a problem with iptables and Apache/PHP, and updated
> > libnetfilter_conntrack, php, and patch-o-matic-ng to the latest.
> >
> > While it was compiling, I figured out the real problem, which is NOT
> > related to anything in DL (long story).
> >
> > If the compile completes, should I upload all three updates anyway?
> 
> Unfortunately they keep removing patches from patch-o-matic-ng , once they
> make it into the mainstream 2.6 kernel.

But I'm only doing this on DL 1.3 w/2.6 kernel.

> Compare the new and the old patch, they probably removed a lot we want
> in there.
> Worst case you need to extract the missing old patches and put them into
> the src/pom-addon folder.

Even in DL 1.3?

 - BS

On Tue, November 27, 2007 08:34, Bruce Smith wrote:
> Is there anything special that needs to be done to upgrade
> patch-o-matic-ng?  I updated the src: patch-o-matic-ng-20071125.tar.bz2. Is
> there anything else that needs to be done?  (DL 1.3)
>
> I was having a problem with iptables and Apache/PHP, and updated
> libnetfilter_conntrack, php, and patch-o-matic-ng to the latest.
>
> While it was compiling, I figured out the real problem, which is NOT
> related to anything in DL (long story).
>
> If the compile completes, should I upload all three updates anyway?

Unfortunately they keep removing patches from patch-o-matic-ng , once they
make it into the mainstream 2.6 kernel.
Compare the new and the old patch, they probably removed a lot we want in
there.

Worst case you need to extract the missing old patches and put them into
the src/pom-addon folder.

-- 

Regards
  Heiko Zuerker
  http://www.devil-linux.org

Is there anything special that needs to be done to upgrade
patch-o-matic-ng?  I updated the src: patch-o-matic-ng-20071125.tar.bz2.
Is there anything else that needs to be done?  (DL 1.3)

I was having a problem with iptables and Apache/PHP, and updated
libnetfilter_conntrack, php, and patch-o-matic-ng to the latest.

While it was compiling, I figured out the real problem, which is NOT
related to anything in DL (long story).

If the compile completes, should I upload all three updates anyway?

 - BS

On Tue, November 20, 2007 13:57, Serge Leschinsky wrote:
> Heiko,
>
>
> Heiko Zuerker wrote:
>
>
>>> For some reasons ntop doesn't link against net-snmp. I'll try to find
>>>  'why'.
>>>
>>
>> It found it on my system.
>> checking for openSSL... ok checking for zlib... ok checking for
>> net-snmp-config... net-snmp-config net-snmp libs: -L/usr/lib -lnetsnmp
>>
> Well, I've found and fixed linking (it was my fault). Now I got the
> following:
>
>
> /usr/include/net-snmp/library/container.h: In function 'CONTAINER_FREE':
> /usr/include/net-snmp/library/container.h:416: error: invalid lvalue in
> assignment make[3]: *** [iface.lo] Error 1
>
>
> Have you meant that error?
>

Yes that's exactly the error I get.

-- 

Regards
  Heiko Zuerker
  http://www.devil-linux.org

Heiko,

Heiko Zuerker wrote:

>> For some reasons ntop doesn't link against net-snmp. I'll try to find
>> 'why'.
> 
> It found it on my system.
> checking for openSSL... ok
> checking for zlib... ok
> checking for net-snmp-config... net-snmp-config
> net-snmp libs: -L/usr/lib -lnetsnmp
> 
Well, I've found and fixed linking (it was my fault). Now I got the following:

/usr/include/net-snmp/library/container.h: In function 'CONTAINER_FREE':
/usr/include/net-snmp/library/container.h:416: error: invalid lvalue in assignment
make[3]: *** [iface.lo] Error 1

Have you meant that error?

--
Sincerely,
Serge Leschinsky

> does anybody have anything in the queue, or can we get 1.2.14 out the door?

Nothing in the queue here.

 - BS

Hey guys,

does anybody have anything in the queue, or can we get 1.2.14 out the door?

-- 

Regards
  Heiko Zuerker
  http://www.devil-linux.org

On Mon, November 19, 2007 08:41, Serge Leschinsky wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> Heiko Zuerker wrote:
>
>
>> it seems like the net-snmp update broke ntop in DL1.3 . It works just
>> fine in 1.2, but I can't figure out why it isn't working in 1.3.
>>
>>
>> I may be missing something, can somebody else take a look?
>>
>
>> From my yesterday build log (ntop):
>>
> --------------------------------------------
> **Testing Optional libraries and headers**
>
>
> checking for Multithreading... ok checking for openSSL... ok checking for
> zlib... ok checking for net-snmp-config... no NET-SNMP is not present: SNMP
> support is disabled --------------------------------------------
>
>
> For some reasons ntop doesn't link against net-snmp. I'll try to find
> 'why'.

It found it on my system.
checking for openSSL... ok
checking for zlib... ok
checking for net-snmp-config... net-snmp-config
net-snmp libs: -L/usr/lib -lnetsnmp


-- 

Regards
  Heiko Zuerker
  http://www.devil-linux.org

Hi,

Heiko Zuerker wrote:

> it seems like the net-snmp update broke ntop in DL1.3 .
> It works just fine in 1.2, but I can't figure out why it isn't working in
> 1.3.
> 
> I may be missing something, can somebody else take a look?

>From my yesterday build log (ntop):
--------------------------------------------
  **Testing Optional libraries and headers**

checking for Multithreading... ok
checking for openSSL... ok
checking for zlib... ok
checking for net-snmp-config... no
NET-SNMP is not present: SNMP support is disabled
--------------------------------------------

For some reasons ntop doesn't link against net-snmp. I'll try to find 'why'.

--
Sincerely,
Serge Leschinsky

On Mon, November 19, 2007 08:19, Serge Leschinsky wrote:
> Since James Chapman has checked in the changes for l2tp driver (see "Fix
> L2TP
> oopses") we can add kernel space realization of l2tp tunneling. So, I'm
> requesting about kernel upgrade to 2.6.23.8 and adding openl2tp
> (http://opensource.katalix.com/openl2tp/, GPL license) instead of l2tpd
> (anyway
> it's unworkable now). If you have no objections I'd like to add it to CVS
> (in two steps - kernel upgrade and then openl2tp).

No complains from my side.

-- 

Regards
  Heiko Zuerker
  http://www.devil-linux.org

Hey,

it seems like the net-snmp update broke ntop in DL1.3 .
It works just fine in 1.2, but I can't figure out why it isn't working in
1.3.

I may be missing something, can somebody else take a look?

-- 

Regards
  Heiko Zuerker
  http://www.devil-linux.org

Hi,

Since James Chapman has checked in the changes for l2tp driver (see "Fix L2TP
oopses") we can add kernel space realization of l2tp tunneling. So, I'm
requesting about kernel upgrade to 2.6.23.8 and adding openl2tp
(http://opensource.katalix.com/openl2tp/, GPL license) instead of l2tpd (anyway
it's unworkable now). If you have no objections I'd like to add it to
CVS (in two steps - kernel upgrade and then openl2tp).

--
Sincerely,
Serge Leschinsky

Heiko Zuerker wrote:

>> I'm going to adopt mppe-mppc patch for 2.6.23 but I have not found the
>> source. :-( If anybody has them I'll be very grateful if you would send
>> them to me directly (not to list).
> 
> I may be mistaken, but I thought I saw some options in the 2.6.23 kernel
> related to that. Can you double check in menuconfig ? Maybe they added it
> to the mainstream kernel.
> 

Thank you, I'll check. Basically, I don't think so, because MPPC is a patented
algorithm (and probably we should include the patch as optional only).

http://mppe-mppc.alphacron.de/
<> Although the module's source code is completely free, MPPC itself is patented
<> algorithm. Patent for *Microsoft* PPC is holded by the  Hifn Inc. This is
<> obvious ;-). Furthermore, MPPE uses RC4[1] encryption algorithm which itself
<> isn't patented, but RC4 is trademark of RSA Data Security Inc.

It's not a problem for my country (no software patents yet), but I'm not sure
about USA.

--
Sincerely,
Serge Leschinsky

On Thu, November 8, 2007 07:48, Serge Leschinsky wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> I'm going to adopt mppe-mppc patch for 2.6.23 but I have not found the
> source. :-( If anybody has them I'll be very grateful if you would send
> them to me directly (not to list).

I may be mistaken, but I thought I saw some options in the 2.6.23 kernel
related to that. Can you double check in menuconfig ? Maybe they added it
to the mainstream kernel.

-- 

Regards
  Heiko Zuerker
  http://www.devil-linux.org

Hi,

I'm going to adopt mppe-mppc patch for 2.6.23 but I have not found the source. :-(
If anybody has them I'll be very grateful if you would send them to me directly
(not to list).

--
Sincerely,
Serge Leschinsky

Heiko Zuerker wrote:

>> Modified Files:
>> md5sum.lst CHANGES Log Message:
>>
>>
>> - updated net-snmp to 5.4.1
> 
> I think we should backport this one to 1.2
> 
Ok, in 5 min.

--
Sincerely,
Serge Leschinsky

On Thu, November 8, 2007 06:52, Serge Leschinsky wrote:
> Update of /cvsroot/devil-linux/build
> In directory sc8-pr-cvs12.sourceforge.net:/tmp/cvs-serv20346
>
>
> Modified Files:
> md5sum.lst CHANGES Log Message:
>
>
> - updated net-snmp to 5.4.1

I think we should backport this one to 1.2

-- 

Regards
  Heiko Zuerker
  http://www.devil-linux.org

> > I noticed that it looks for configs on /dev/hd* drives before /dev/sd*
> > drives, which means it checks IDE hard drives before USB flash drives.
> >
> > Is that the way it should work Heiko?
> >
> > IIRC, it also checks for the config on the CD before external drives
> > too, which means you can't override a config burned on the CD.
> 
> I'm open on what we check first, you can change it if you want.

I'm open too.  My thought was it should check the most common devices we
use first.

I was also thinking that it'd be nice to have the option to override a
config burned on CD.

Anyone else have an opinion on the subject?

 - BS