The difference between active and passive is not whether there is an 'action' but the syntactic role of the person or thing 'acted upon'.
In a sentence cast in the active voice, the subject is the Agent - the 'doer' - and the direct object is the Patient - the one 'acted upon' or 'done to'.
Agent loves Patient.
When that sentence is recast in the passive voice, the Patient becomes the subject and the Agent disappears, or is relegated to a prepositional phrase.
Patient is loved [by Agent].
So intransitive verbs - verbs which do not take a direct object - cannot be cast in the passive voice, because there's no Patient to become the subject of a passive sentence.
Agent dies. ... there's no Patient who can ✲'be died by'!
BE is an intransitive verb: it has no Patient, only an Agent to whom some quality is imputed, so it cannot be cast in the passive voice. It is always active.
✲ marks an utterance as unacceptable
This is a silly question. It asks one to do something that can't be done.
The sentence
- I must go and look for my brothers.
is Intransitive, but Passive can only apply to a Transitive clause.
The Passive rule promotes the direct object to subject, demotes the old subject to an optional object of by, and adds the auxiliary verb be before the past participle form of the main transitive verb. Like this:
- Marie shot my cousin. == Passive => My cousin was shot (by Marie).
But if the clause isn't transitive, there isn't a direct object to promote, and other noun phrases don't usually work.
- Mary slept all day. but not *All day was slept (by Mary).
Sometimes prepositional objects can be passivized, if the preposition is one that makes a transitive verb out of an intransitive one, like look (at) or listen (to)
- We must look at/listen to that again. == Passive => That must be looked at/listened to again.
But that's rarely the case, so most prepositions after verbs don't mark direct objects. And without a direct object, Passive is impossible.
The real solution is to get a new textbook that actually describes English, instead of something like English.
Best Answer
The first phrase could have been:
You put up with something that is annoying, irritating, or painful. For instance, he may suffer from severe backache but because there is no cure, and the doctors cannot help him, he has no choice but to put up with the pain.
Now, why anyone would put this type of sentence in the passive voice is quite beyond me. The agent, the man, is not performing an action on his back, rather it his back that is inflicting an action.
The original phrase is however:
the passive voice equivalent is:
But it sounds awkward, clumsy, unnatural and confusing. The present perfect continuous tense is rarely used in the passive voice. Compare the following phrases
Passive 1) Two books about Moriarty were written by him.
A 2) He has written two books about Moriarty.
P 2) Two books about Moriarty have been written by him.
A 3) He has been writing a book about Moriarty all his life.
P 3 Sounds confusing, despite it being grammatically correct. No one speaks like that and I doubt there are many examples of this type of passive construction in literature or in any type of journals (at least I hope not!)
For sentence number 2 it is exactly as @relaxing stated in his answer. The correct form is:
Compare
The cooking used to be done by Marry. Passive
Joe used to drive his kids to school every day Active
The BBC has an article on the passive voice construction using the present perfect continuous