a little requiest

andru sprott andru at btinternet.com
Tue Aug 29 10:03:54 PDT 2000


> +-andru sprott-(andru at btinternet.com)-[22.08.00 06:29]:
> > windows has prompted me to try lfs again, so i'm goin to
> > use 2.3.7. but one thing, i notice from this list that many
> > errors are in the book, but there don't seem to be any
> > corrections made to it.

> There are many corrections, but Gerard does not make "service packs"
> available... Just wait for the next stable release and nearly everything
> should be fixed. BTW. 2.4 is going to come in less than a week.

and then errors creep into 2.4.

> Or browse through the list-archive from the day G announced  the last
> version.  All Bugs are described there mostly (always) with a solution.

not everybody who uses lfs is on the mailin lists.

> > if possible could you still support the 'older' versions with
> > their own versions, much the same way that m$ supports
> > 3.1, 95, 98 etc.

> I think that would be a little heavy - maintaining this kind of book is
> quite much work. And especially - a book-version is not such a big
> change like 3.1 to 95 e.g. The minor version-number changes are a kind
> of bugfix or improvements...

there is only one stable and one developement version. heck, it's only a
case of correctin errors and chaingin the micro version number and postin
it on the site - and it doesn't take all day to upload it.

it's this sort of 'elite' attitude that sends people away in droves, and
makes
the learnin curve for linux really steep.

also, bein a software developer myself, it is hard to accept how so many
errors can creep into the book. after all, it is a program of a kind. when i
write a batch of code, i always read thru it to check for syntax errors.
and after that i debug it. and there are many 'what if' situations that have
to be anticipated and checked.

what's more, what about the many people who are not on these lists and
never find out about the fixes posted here. doesn't say much for lfs then.
but don't get me wrong. i'm not havin a go at lfs, i think it's really good
and it's just right for me to setup my network. in the end i hope to get
all machines on linux includin my sparc elc.

so i hope this isn't taken as a criticism, but as a requiest to make lfs
more
stable.

andrew








More information about the lfs-dev mailing list