Update to current packages or PLFS first?

Gerard Beekmans gerard at linuxfromscratch.org
Tue Apr 29 21:25:35 PDT 2003


As far as I can see we have two options to get development started again:

1) Begin with updating to all the latest packages, or
2) Integrating the pure-lfs.txt hint, or

pure-lfs is based on newer packages for some of the instructions, so if we 
went the pure-lfs route, it would mean we update only partly to the latest 
packages (at first) followed by the rest later.

But if we go the update packages route first, we get into some issues, like 
glibc-2.3.2. It'll have a temporary cludge until pure-lfs is applied after 
which the cludge would be removed (touching a missing header file the issue 
was if I recall correctly).

On a totally different note, Greg let me know he'll be away for a week or so 
and I thought it would be only fair if he were here when the change-over 
happened. Maybe he doesn't care for that, but it only seems right since he is  
a large part of the pure-lfs effort (yes, you are too Ryan ;)

The week and a halve that Greg's going to be away would give us all the time 
we need to update to all the latest packages and test the new patches that 
come with some of the packages. Then there'll be less to test with the move 
to pure-lfs itself which is a large undertaking all by itself without having 
to update and test new packages alongside of it.

So that's my preference. Packages first, pure-lfs immediately afterwards. If 
anybody disagrees, speak up (or forever hold your peace).

-- 
Gerard Beekmans
http://linuxfromscratch.org

<!-- Linux Consultant --- OSDN -->
<!-- Technical Writer --- CheapBytes -->

<!-- If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem -->

-- 
Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
and put 'unsubscribe lfs-dev' in the subject header of the message



More information about the lfs-dev mailing list