Simon Perreault nomis80 at
Sun Jan 14 14:31:34 PST 2001

Hash: SHA1

On Sunday 14 January 2001 17:02, Steve Hayashi wrote:
> My only guess towards it is that installation requires constant monitoring
> and it's entirely too easy to f*** it up (for every perfect installation
> I've had of LFS, I've easily had 20 that didn't make it)

Sure, an automated installation IS required for corporate acceptance of LFS. 
That's one of the goals of ALFS: make LFS useable by enterprises.

As for the other point, well, I just have to say that you maybe haven't built 
enough LFS systems. Many of us have come to a point where we can build an 
entire LFS sytem plus the required daemons and stuff for a specific purpose 
in less than a day's work. For these people, building an LFS system isn't 
daunting at all, it's as easy as "./configure && make && make intall". The 
point is that LFS isn't "too easy to f*** [...] up", it's just that you have 
to spend some time learning how to do it correctly. And once it is installed, 
it is MUCH harder to f*** up a distro system than an LFS system. Remember all 
the troubles you had with the numerous incompatible configuration tools that 
all ship with the same distro.

- -- 
Public key:
- --Support your government, give Echelon / Carnivore something to parse--
classfield top-secret government restricted data information project CIA
KGB GRU DISA DoD defense systems military systems spy steal terrorist
Allah Natasha Gregori destroy destruct attack democracy will send Russia
bank system compromise international own rule the world ATSC RTEM warmod
ATMD force power enforce sensitive directorate TSP NSTD ORD DD2-N AMTAS
STRAP warrior-T presidental elections policital foreign embassy takeover
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see


Unsubscribe: send email to lfs-discuss-request at
and put unsubscribe in the subject header of the message

More information about the lfs-dev mailing list