[Clfs-dev] CLFS 1.1.0-rc2

[db m]

Greetings,

> Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2008 12:19:50 -0400
> From: jciccone
> 
> Subject: Re: [Clfs-dev] CLFS 1.1.0-rc2
> 
> db m wrote:
> > I was going to say I completed a build of rc1 in x86-64_multilib guise via
> > chroot over the weekend without any apparent hiccups, but seeing this
> > posting, I've got time to do it again and pay a bit more attention viz
> > ticket-169....
>
jciccone> The build command still havn't changed, and most likely wont. 169 just
jciccone> has todo with some text changes.
>
> > On the side, I've been building against CLFS SVN-20080714 in the same
> > guise, following the CBLFS wiki -- this is pretty close to what 1.1.0
> > is going
> > to be. So far (322 packages) and the travel has been really good with
> > this base set. That said, 1.1.0 will break -some- parts of the CBLFS
> > pages,
> > but I'm loath to do any editing there before 1.1.0 rolls out...
>
jciccone> I should probably re-work the development version of Xorg in CBLFS as
jciccone> well. It's been a month or two and quite a bit has changed.
>
> > Perhaps OT here...but can one leave oneself notes on the 'my talk' pages
> > of the CBLFS wiki ...?...
>
jciccone> Sure, we just wanted to leave stuff off the packages talk pages. The
jciccone> better place to report errors is on this mailing list or in the IRC
jciccone> channel. The talk pages were forgotten about and errors would sit there
jciccone> for a month or so before someone noticed. There's just too many pages to
jciccone> watch all the talk pages.
>
>

Ahh, okay.....I wasn't absolutely sure CBLFS stuff was fodder for in here - being
on the other side of the lower half of the planet, IRC somehow doesn't quite
cut it (everyone asleep when I'm awake and vice-versa ;)...

I'm going to agree with you about an Xorg re-work.....most of that I did using the
semi-automated build scripts where possible, which seem to complete okay.
Later on though, a couple of curious things happen....(multilib build)

1> The command  'Xorg -configure' refused to work for me, claiming to be unable
to find it's libs (drivers, modules, etc). Strangely, issuing 'Xorg' (without the 
-configure switch) -did- work, so I basically just copied across my old xorg.conf
and went from there. It left me thinking something in the '-configure' switch was 
hard-coded in regards path to xorg_libs.....

2> Later....I think qt3 first tossed this up, but a few other packages did too....there's
some confusion with Xmd.h when building 32bit stuffs. Xmd.h defines 'CARD32' as
being 'typedef long unsigned int', however a couple of parts of qt3 (& others) have 
'CARD32' slated as being 'typedef unsigned int' .... which will of course cause a 
compilation error. I haven't worked out if this is xorg's fault or not yet....(so far my
resolve has been to manually edit those few offending headers to agree with Xmd.h's 
view of the world...)....(which is probably not a correct thing to do)...

 As said though, perhaps the priority is to first get 1.1.0 out there and fix CBLFS issues
beyond that juncture..and with that, I head off to build rc2....

Regards,

Don







_________________________________________________________________
Net yourself a bargain. Find great deals on eBay.
http://a.ninemsn.com.au/b.aspx?URL=http%3A%2F%2Frover%2Eebay%2Ecom%2Frover%2F1%2F705%2D10129%2D5668%2D323%2F4%3Fid%3D10&_t=763807330&_r=hotmailTAGLINES&_m=EXT
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.clfs.org/pipermail/clfs-dev-clfs.org/attachments/20080902/89aeeb6b/attachment-0001.htm>