On Sat, Mar 07, 2015 at 06:10:29PM +0000, Ken Moffat wrote: > On Sat, Mar 07, 2015 at 04:33:17AM +0000, Ken Moffat wrote: > > > > But udev extras fro meudev installs two of the beasties in my > > builds, libgudev-1.0.a and libudev.a and yet in the book we only > > mention libgudev-1.0.so which makes me ask : how are you guys > > preventing those static libs from being installed ? > > > A straight --disable-static : what puzzled me was that the book only > mentions .so and yet my last few builds have all had the static libs > too. Maybe eudev originally did not install them. And libudev > itself is only recreated by the reinstall, it already exists. > > Strangely, I just tested this on a fully-completed desktop, and both > tests pass - in LFS chroot the suite continues to claim that > udev-test.pl failed, without showing any individual test failures. > That script only uses 'warnings' and 'strict', so does not need any > extra modules, and all the test rules and devices are within the > eudev source. Ah! It fails if run as root. No idea why. > But the PASS was as bogus as the FAIL. In an LFS build (as root), I append the detailed log from udev-test.pl to my log from 'make check', which is how I know that every individual test seemed to pass. When I tested yersterday, I did not bother to look at the internal log.
Now that I've completed my first attempt at disposing of static libs, and testing eudev as user nobody during that, the internal log reported: Must have root permissions to run properly. ĸen -- Nanny Ogg usually went to bed early. After all, she was an old lady. Sometimes she went to bed as early as 6 a.m. -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
