Error while linking gnu coreutils to linux.

Originally Posted by dugan Not sure what your point its. --prefix tells "make install" where to install it. So what I said was correct.

Oh sorry I thought you mean't ./configure --prefix installs it to that directory. Sorry

Originally Posted by brianL Yeah, yeah, yeah. You know best. Go ahead - put gnu into the kernel. Then carry on regardless. Good luck!

Here's some advice. Instead of responding to someone
with sarcasm maybe correct them instead. If you like
Linux then maybe you should be more open source about
your knowledge. I guess that answers why you only have one rep despite
being a longtime user in 2006. In that case linuxquestions.org
is not for you... I even admitted that I may be wrong and you decided.
to just not respond. Once again, be more open source about your knowledge.

Originally Posted by brianL Yeah, yeah, yeah. You know best. Go ahead - put gnu into the kernel. Then carry on regardless. Good luck!

Just saying.

Originally Posted by audiotore341 Here's some advice. Instead of responding to someone with sarcasm maybe correct them instead. If you like Linux then maybe you should be more open source about your knowledge. I guess that answers why you only have one rep despite being a longtime user in 2006. In that case linuxquestions.org is not for you... I even admitted that I may be wrong and you decided. to just not respond. Once again, be more open source about your knowledge.

I was driven to sarcasm because of your inability to take advice, in this thread, and in your previous thread about putting a desktop in the kernel.
As for my reputation: look again, it's disabled. Not shown. My knowledge is limited, but enough to know that putting a desktop environment and coreutils into the kernel is a bad or impossible idea.
Just checked my reputation: 2446.

Originally Posted by brianL No distro is made by "putting gnu into the kernel".

Isn't that a bit like what GRUB does? The GRUB core is basically a stripped-down Linux kernel (no process management and only the most basic drivers) and then they shoehorned a shell into it. I suppose it would be possible to do the same with an intact kernel. But I can't imagine why anyone would want to.

If you put everything into one bloated piece of software, then you've recreated Windows. So why not use Windows if that's the kind of thing you like?

Incidently, that's why I don't like GRUB!

Originally Posted by brianL I was driven to sarcasm because of your inability to take advice, in this thread, and in your previous thread about putting a desktop in the kernel. As for my reputation: look again, it's disabled. Not shown. My knowledge is limited, but enough to know that putting a desktop environment and coreutils into the kernel is a bad or impossible idea. Just checked my reputation: 2446.

I knew it was impossible to put a gui directly on top of the kernel. I learned from that. https://stackoverflow.com/questions/...nd-make-an-iso
So according to that stackoverflow link it said in order for the kernel to be useful we needed something like gnu which I guess makes sense
because distros have gnu/linux in them so I assumed that was kind of the first step to it. Of course not a lot of people have written a
distro from scratch but I would assume that there would be at least some documentation on this because thats what linux was for.
At least that was the purpose back then. I was able to take advice its just that I'm was still figuring out the first step to what
I needed to do to accomplish my task.

I suggest you install the distro "Linux from scratch" so you learn how Linux actually works, before attempting to build a distro yourself.

Read Linux from Scratch, you don't need to actually do it, but read it to get some idea of what building a distro entails.

https://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/stable/

And read more about Linux in general. Things like the filesystem, where everything goes, etc.

Originally Posted by audiotore341 Here's some advice. Instead of responding to someone with sarcasm maybe correct them instead. If you like Linux then maybe you should be more open source about your knowledge. I guess that answers why you only have one rep despite being a longtime user in 2006. In that case linuxquestions.org is not for you... I even admitted that I may be wrong and you decided. to just not respond. Once again, be more open source about your knowledge.

If you hadn’t spent your entire posting history flaunting the fact that you weren’t willing to listen, then this might be a valid point.

I echo the sentiment of trying "LFS = Linux From Scratch." Also, simply visit the internet "kernel" groups and even the subforum at this site. Download a copy of kernel source and actually look at what it is and isn't.

IBM's original term for this was SCP = System [Hardware ...] Control Program, and I always liked that term because: "the kernel is strictly concerned with hardware." It manages CPUs and network devices, and provides a "file system" metaphor for the management of storage space. It provides access control. But, in a certain sort of way, it is a passive player. It provides the core services that everything needs, but it does so "impartially" and "indifferently."

Most of what we consider to be "a minimal Linux distribution" isn't(!) "the kernel." LFS will very quickly make this clear to you, as will "Gentoo," which is an entirely source-code based distribution where you "compile everything to order" according to parameters that are precisely selected for your machine. "The kernel" is actually a comparatively small piece of software.

Going back to your subject: I don’t think you know what “link” means.

EDIT:

Your project is so wrongheaded that it's hard to know where to begin explaining why you'll get nowhere. However, I hope the following helps a bit:

Linux explained part 2 : Bootloader, Init and Shell

@audiotore341
Which linux distro are you running now, if any? In your "desktop on top of the kernel" thread, you mention "arch linux, which I installed a billion times". Well, let's say you might have installed Arch once or a few times. That experience would surely give you more knowledge than you apparently possess.

Man, I kind of wish the original question had been addressed here because I'm running into the same exact issue.

Running `make install` for coreutils-8.24 works fine, but attempting to install coreutils-9.2 results in this same "Inappropriate ioctl for device" error for every ginstall command.

My best guess is that this has something to do with my `stty erase` options in .profile or .bashrc/.cshrc/.zshrc, because those produce a similar error when run on a non-interactive shell. I bet my if/else guard to ensure it only runs on an interactive shell is not fully protecting against whatever is going on here with ginstall.

FWIW it's also okay for coreutils-9.0

Originally Posted by szofar Running `make install` for coreutils-8.24 works fine, but attempting to install coreutils-9.2 results in this same "Inappropriate ioctl for device" error for every ginstall command.

Originally Posted by szofar FWIW it's also okay for coreutils-9.0

If the only thing changing is the coreutils version then make sure you've checked the readme/docs for any deliberate changes, and if none then maybe you've uncovered a bug - bring it up on the relevant GNU coreutils mailing list, (after searching to check whether it has been raised already).