r1373 - / trunk/BOOK trunk/BOOK/cross-tools trunk/BOOK/cross-tools/64 trunk/BOOK/cross-tools/common trunk/BOOK/cross-tools/mips trunk/BOOK/cross-tools/mips64 trunk/BOOK/cross-tools/mips64-64 trunk/BOOK/cross-tools/multilib trunk/BOOK/cross-tools/ppc trunk/BOOK/cross-tools/sparc64 trunk/BOOK/cross-tools/sparc64-64 trunk/BOOK/final-system/mips trunk/BOOK/final-system/mips64 trunk/BOOK/final-system/sparc64-64 trunk/BOOK/final-system/x86_64-64

Justin R. Knierim lfs at lfs-matrix.net
Thu Apr 13 18:53:00 PDT 2006

Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
> Submitting fodder? Explaining new caveats or new aspects that affect the 
> entire build is fodder?

As for the changelog entry you were referring to, I'm not a clfs dev but 
  I see perfect sense in removing files that only have includes in them. 
  If you are including a whole file, you can remove the file and use the 
original directly.

I'm not so sure about the "then when there *is* something pertaining to 
development asked, it goes ignored" as I haven't seen this.  Looking 
through the archives, I see most emails answered.  Although the spam and 
virus emails which almost outnumber the real emails nowadays might have 
hidden something.

As for the change to the new glibc and gcc, it has been in Trac as a bug 
sent to the cross-lfs list over a month ago.  It is not like LFS where 
tickets go to lfs-book where they are somewhat hidden, on cross-lfs it 
is all there.  Jim, Ryan, Joe and Chris all commented on the tickets, so 
I don't know what else there is to discuss.  It is just my opinion, but 
emailing the list to say "I'm adding glibc-2.4 to the book" is redundant 
when there is the open ticket.  If jim had problems (which judging by 
the changes there weren't any huge bugs or differences), I'm sure he 
would have asked the list.

Just my opinion.


More information about the cross-lfs mailing list