Version number of next LFS release

Tushar Teredesai tushar at
Wed Jan 15 17:56:40 PST 2003

Gerard Beekmans wrote:

>On January 15, 2003 05:19 pm, Jesse Tie-Ten-Quee wrote:
>>(&%(!&$(@!&, sigh.  So much for the blfs-book staying as a seperate
Gotcha:) That's why I began with "I think...". I made the suggestion coz 
IMO this may be an FAQ on blfs-support (even if the compatible LFS 
version is included in the introductory chapter).

>I agree it won't be workable. We'd have to coordihat nate new releases all the 
>time. What if there isn't anything in BLFS changed since the last LFS release 
>(unlikely, but just a theory)...we'd release BLFS again without changes. Kind 
>of odd.
That would be unlikely since an LFS release is not very frequent. Also 
there are no major packages in BLFS that would require an version 
increment, so lfs could always be  the driver.

But anyways I don't have strong feelings either way.

Tushar Teredesai

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

More information about the lfs-dev mailing list