On Thu, Aug 03, 2017 at 08:07:00PM -0400, Alain Toussaint wrote:
> > And then I looked around to see what unmaintained systems I had
> > (bearing in mind that provided nfs and ssh still work, all I need to
> > build a new system comfortably is a working Xorg).  On my old phenom
> > I had an LFS-7.6 system, gcc-4.9.1, binutils-2.24 (and headers from
> > 3.16 with a running 3.18 kernel).
> 
> Hold on. I'm getting around to finishing my usb key image which is
> 64-bit computer agnostic (even mpfr is compiled for generic-x86_64
> which mean k8 code, no mmx or its amd equivalent, sse and sse2 only).
> Obviously, I don't compile in Xorg but you get a command line with
> root and lfs account already setup with the correct environment
> variables.
> 
> it include all of LFS and these apps from BLFS:
> 
> 1-: openssl
> 2-: dosfstools (I need it for uefi)
> 3-: popt
> 4-: icu
> 5-: gptfdisk
> 6-: lynx browser
> 7-: smartmontools
> 8-: libffi
> 9-: libusb
> 10-: gpm
> 11-: hdparm
> 12-: gnu which
> 13-: lm_sensors
> 14-: pciutils
> 15-: sg3_utils
> 16-: python 2
> 17-: usbutils
> 18-: dhcpcd
> 19-: ntp
> 20-: curl
> 21-: wget
> 22-: git
> 23-: libnl
> 24-: wpa_supplicant (sans QT).
> 25-: traceroute
> 
> it load into a ramdrive (size: 1.5GB, your machine will probably need
> 4 GB of ram) and I can build both a bios based image (bootloader:
> grub-2) or uefi (bootloader: refind). It'll be ready and uploaded on
> my linode tomorrow.
> 
> Do you need it?
> 
> Alain

For these machines, I've got current systems (8.0 or newer), as well
as a rescue CD, so no thanks.

I think you maybe misunderstood what I was saying - these systems
are partitioned to support development with several filesystems
used, or available, for LFS.  I normally build in Xorg, and all my
sources and scripts are mounted over nfs.

Because these systems are no-longer maintained (and have
known-vulnerable packages such as old versions of firefox, and
probably an unmaintained old openssl), I have to remind myself to
not use anything except terms (urxvt).

Hmm, I'm using current LFS with glibc-2.26 and the current glibc fhs
patch.  So its possible something else needs to change.  I just
mention that because I found a 7.8 system (gcc-5.2.0) and that too
has just failed in gcc pass 2 with what the same error.

When I said I hadn't got as far as glibc, I was of course mistaken.
I'm now thinking that perhaps even gcc-5.2 is too old to build a
full gcc-7.1, because of changed C++ standards.

ĸen
-- 
I live in a city. I know sparrows from starlings.  After that
everything is a duck as far as I'm concerned.  -- Monstrous Regiment
-- 
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Reply via email to