Linux From ScratchThis Forum is for the discussion of LFS.
LFS is a project that provides you with the steps necessary to build your own custom Linux system.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
Distribution: LFS 9.0 Custom, Merged Usr, Linux 4.19.x
Posts: 616
Rep:
Is it ready? Look at the screenshot... My only complaint is that PaleMoon won't build with either GCC-9.2.0 or glibc-2.30, dunno which one is causing the issue.
Is it ready? Look at the screenshot... My only complaint is that PaleMoon won't build with either GCC-9.2.0 or glibc-2.30, dunno which one is causing the issue.
It's gcc. Palemoon won't build with any recent gcc because some of its headers contain syntax that isn't valid any more. gcc-6 should work.
Is it ready? Look at the screenshot... My only complaint is that PaleMoon won't build with either GCC-9.2.0 or glibc-2.30, dunno which one is causing the issue.
FWIW, Firefox 60.8.0 esr will not build with glibc-2.30. I'm in the process of rolling back to to glibc-2.29. The issue is the same as with the current Seamonkey browser - there is a solution in the book for that and i tried to apply it to firefox esr but it didn't work.
I won't be making a fresh build of 9.0 this time. I've been rolling along with the SVN version and it works great. I'm current on just about everything but glibc. I build a lot of non-lfs items for my desktop and no telling how many things the new glibc will break. I'm not gonna risk it.
I just saw a blfs-dev post that blfs-9.0-rc1 will be released on Sunday, so I will continue after that. Actually, I'm surprised they managed to freeze it; there's been a huge amount of problems on that list.
Build blfs 9.0 stable with 9.0 rc base system alrady done ??
Hi All,
I finished the blfs 9.0 rc edition with only a couple of problems. Rustc gave me some trouble
when installing librsvg for abiword.Never could get it to install. Now that the stable version is out today I will do it.
Just wondering if my 9.0 rc-1 stable lfs is good enough or should I rebuild lfs 9.0 stable?
Any thoughts?
thanks
Last edited by rabidlinux; 09-01-2019 at 03:56 PM.
Everything has installed fine and even some of my usually problem programs worked good.
Firefox, Thunderbird and the dreaded rustc worked perfect. Before I ran into problems with rustc and librsvg for Abiword with 9.0 rc-1. Will be working on Media players and sound next.
Good luck to all
I'm ploughing through BLFS 9.0 and feeling increasingly unhappy about it. There seem to be all kinds of extra dependencies compared with earlier versions. It used to be so easy to craft a system that just contained what I wanted. It was fun, and now increasingly it isn't fun at all, it's frustrating. I think I am getting too old for this lark.
I'm ploughing through BLFS 9.0 and feeling increasingly unhappy about it. There seem to be all kinds of extra dependencies compared with earlier versions. It used to be so easy to craft a system that just contained what I wanted. It was fun, and now increasingly it isn't fun at all, it's frustrating. I think I am getting too old for this lark.
Yeah, this is also my experience after a couple of years of LFS/BLFS (starting with LFS-3.3). But seems there is no way back.
It's not only full-bloat-software like KDE, which needs (for my taste) absolutely unnecessary things like PAM or pulseaudio, but also small, tiny things like e.g. ntp start to need couples of perl modules, where i'd suspect, that a link against openssl should be sufficient.
But to be a little bit positive: This makes building a BLFS much more easier. You do not have to think any longer: Do i need this package? No, it's almost sure, that _every_ package will be needed ;-)
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.