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.
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.
Introduction to Linux - A Hands on Guide
This guide was created as an overview of the Linux Operating System, geared toward new users as an exploration tour and getting started guide, with exercises at the end of each chapter.
For more advanced trainees it can be a desktop reference, and a collection of the base knowledge needed to proceed with system and network administration. This book contains many real life examples derived from the author's experience as a Linux system and network administrator, trainer and consultant. They hope these examples will help you to get a better understanding of the Linux system and that you feel encouraged to try out things on your own.
Click Here to receive this Complete Guide absolutely free.
I'd really like to get lfs working but I'm running into some problems that to me don't make sense.
For instance mkdir tools and then creating a symlink to root. Not only does this not make sense but it doesn't work. There's another symlink that I can't locate at the moment where you link to c. That doesn't work for me either
It's been a while since I used LFS. Creating symlinks always seemed a bit strange because of the ordering of the arguments for the ln command. I am positive that if you follow the books instructions exactly then you can overcome your difficulties.
Try man ln if you really want to understand how to use the ln command.
Dude, thats just the problem! We are following the book to the letter. The lfs manual is riddled with wholes and misinformation, thats what I've been trying to tell you guys. Look, it may be that you former lfs builders used an older manual and maybe that manual was a little more precise, but 6.0 is a mess!!!
Originally posted by matthewa Dude, thats just the problem! We are following the book to the letter. The lfs manual is riddled with wholes and misinformation, thats what I've been trying to tell you guys. Look, it may be that you former lfs builders used an older manual and maybe that manual was a little more precise, but 6.0 is a mess!!!
Flawless? Ok.......we'll skip that argument altogether because it's obvious that the Linux community has to much pride to admit when there actually is a flaw!
Let's move on to the real point here. I really don't consider myself a Linux Beginner! I have been running on Linux systems for over two years now, RedHat.........Suse..........Mandrake.............FedoraCore..............SystemRescue (which I use nearly every day in my business).........Knoppix.............knoppix-STD.......and a whole host of others. Yes, I am a beginner when it comes to building a Linux system from the ground up. Thats why I began the lfs experience, and believe me it was an experience! My quest was to learn more about how Linux worked internally. My results...........: (other than the fact that eaach time I tried to post a help post in this forum on the topic I got some smart-ass answer):
I experienced problems at every single stage of the book, not because Im a beginner, but rather the information contained within the book is out-of-place, misinformed, and just plain wrong! Heres an example...........It begins by telling you about how you need to partition your harddrive for the build, then download the packages and patches, then set up your working environment ................THEN IT TELLS YOU THAT YOU NEED A CERTAIN KERNEL ON THE HOST COMPUTER COMPILED A CERTAIN WAY!!!!!!!!!!........HUH? Should'nt that have been the first piece of information? Now, doesnt that kinda negate all that work you just did? Now you gotta do it all again if you dont have the right kernel!
So, tell me this............if a beginner wants to learn to build a Linux System........how is that beginner supose to learn when the teacher fails to convey the lesson properly?
Another question......Do you really think that this is the only way to build a Linux system? I guess all of the popular Linux distros were built this way to huh?..........Wrong!
There are other ways........there are better ways...........and I have found them. My system is up and running. Took me all of two days and the information was concise and to the point.
While I agree that the host requirements should have been mentioned earlier in the book, prehaps in the prerequisites, not meeting those requirements hardly forces you to start all over. And if you're not comfortable in upgrading your host's kernel and/or gcc, you could always just download the LFS Live CD and instantly solve all your problems. It's also a generally good idea to skim through something first vs just starting it.
Is the LFS 6.0 book perfect? No. But given an adequate host, most any level user with a little common sense can do it. But sure you are likely to run into road blocks along the way. That's just part of the "learning process", if you ask me.
nothing personal, matthewa, but you need to sit down. the only commands you have to "do all over again" are:
mount /dev/hda? $LFS
doesn't sound like too tough a job for a linux stud like you, does it? it's a fine book and if you actually read the thing instead of just looking at the commands it states on p.38:
"In other words, more advanced techniques could be used to build the system."
Your rant about how "there are better ways" shows you weren't paying much attention to the text, just the commands, so i'm not surprised your lfs build attempts thus far have tanked.
finally, you contend that the book is "out-of-place, misinformed, and wrong" and then back it with a singular argument that you should have been told you needed a 2.6 kernel earlier on in the book. and then whine about all the extra work you have to do (three commands, ooooh..) because of this horrific mistake that proves lfs is an idiot's paradise. eesh. like i said, just sit down. you're not that good.
besides, i'm wondering why a self-described linux champ like yourself would be running a 2.4 kernel in the first place...-)
Hey Hey Hey now.... What chu' got against a 2.4 kernel? They are a hell of alot more stable then that steaming pile of 2.6....
Seriously tho... I myself found the book to be straight forward and didn't have any problems but that doesn't mean other people are going to have the same expierences... We all need to blow some steam off now and again.
lol, lfs has at times driven me nuts, definitely. i guess what steamed me most was the "better ways" comment, the book has a specific disclaimer regarding that so it seemed a totally unfair and cheap shot.
I hear that the 2.6 is now too big to put on a floppy. ugh. not really what i wanted to hear but oh well...-)
hmm..seems to be a long debate abt LFS.......here are my coments....
first of all, i would agree that LFS is not the only way to build a linux distribution..u do have many ways but i would say LFS is the THE BEST in uderstanding how a linux system is build......
ofcourse it is clear that Beginners CANNOT build LFS without any FLAWS!......they have a long way to go...for example.......it is not wise to say "i cant understand how the hell to compile kernel" after going to kernel compilation chapter!................i think i made it clear.........
i think there are few flaws but that am damn sure would be related to ur host's system and not LFS's error.........and if there would be any change the LFS guys have asked to check with a URL, for example when u do 'make check' for gcc, for i686 machines they have given specific URL to check with the test summaries and there also to be done with some optimization tweak if Athlon machines.....so here if u r a beginner u cant BLAME LFS to be wrong!
ofcourse it is not i didnt get any error...........i just started LFS 6.0 last week and now becoz of a simple error now i have to rebuild my LFS system!!.....the mistake was GCC was not installed in the LFS system.........probably i shud have missed the 'ln -s gcc /tools/bin/cc" becoz there was no cc file...i cant tell this to be an error of LFS but it shud my mistake!...........
the GCC and GLibc are very important and it is always wise to know what these 2 are and how they are configured for a machine.....those static and dynamic concepts are really important...
people can try Busybox before going to LFS also becoz that does provide a basic root filesystem and utils working........http://www.busybox.net/ , this is just for ur understanding and IT IS NOT ANOTHER OPTION!