Perhaps this does need some more thinking through

Jason Gurtz jason at
Sat Jan 20 23:16:58 PST 2001

> Are there many people who would be against the two different off-toic
> lists? I myself don't care, but others may (speak up now or be silent
> forever). More to the point: do people want to receive general LFS
> chatter but not general non-LFS chatter.
 I think there should be just the lfs-misc.  two OT list's would just be too
complex, although all i would do is filter both of those lists into an
'lfs-OT' folder...

Other then that, i think this is moving in the right direction.  Good luck
in making your decision.

I'm finding it interesting that 'all of this' kinda means that the *LFS
project has reached a certain point of maturity.  I haven't been involved in
the *nix/hacker(white hat)/openSource community for too long, but I would
venture to guess that this is just one more case of history repeating it's


| jason(at)tommyk(dot)com | |
| -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----                                     |
| Version: 3.12                                                       |
| GO/IT$/CS> d+(-) s+: a25 C++++(+) UL+++(B+>+++)(C+) P+ L++ E- W+++  |
| N+ o K? w+ !O M- V->+++ PS+++ PE Y+ PGP- (!)t !5 !X R* !tv(-) b++   |
| DI-- D+ G e h++ r y++**         +-----------------------------------+
| ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ |  |

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