[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Failure to build Jessie with MATE



>Anything? Without seeing your configs, there's no way for us to
>troubleshoot.
So you're saying you haven't seen the configs from August 7.

>The errors you showed in your previous email
This indicates, but is not really clear, that you at least have seen them.
To save me posting the exact same things again if I don't need to please
indicate if you have the configs from August 7.

The reason I am asking is apart from the version of Live Build (being kept up to date) nothing
 else (apart from my machine being kept up to date) has changed.

I will do another fresh install of Jessie with completely up to date packages later today
and post all details after that.

On 4 October 2014 01:33, Ben Armstrong <synrg@sanctuary.nslug.ns.ca> wrote:
On 03/10/14 03:59 AM, Michael . wrote:
> I am still having this problem.
> I am unable to build anything with Live Build 4.

Anything? Without seeing your configs, there's no way for us to
troubleshoot.

> Live Build 3 (up to date) is working fine but Live Build 4 (up to
> date) fails at the same point each time

I don't know what you mean by "working fine", if you're trying to do
Jessie builds. Those are only supported by live-build 4.0.2-1, and
depending on if your use case is addressed in some of the latest patches
in git, you may need the git version instead.

The errors you showed in your previous email were from a version that is
far too old for me to tell if they would be applicable to a current
version, so you must show *current* error output using the latest
version of live-build, *plus* your configs for us to be of any help to
you at all.

Ben
p.s. I just kicked off a Jessie + Mate build on the web builder and it
completed successfully. I haven't tested the resulting image yet, but
already I'm ahead of you in that the build succeeds. If your builds
aren't succeeding you either: 1) are still on a too-old version or 2)
have problems specific to your config or 3) both :)



Reply to: