Version number of next LFS release

Bruce Dubbs bdubbs at
Wed Jan 15 18:50:44 PST 2003

Gerard Beekmans wrote:

>For most part BLFS doesn't 
>depend on a specific LFS version anyway so they can go their own paths.

I disagree.  We do rely on LFS and build to the current version.  The 
issue of bison and XFree86 (and other packages) come to mind 
immediately.  Of course the glibc and gcc issues affect BLFS too.

I've already told Mark that, in my opinion, we should sync BLFS to LFS 
and make addidional releases as separate point releases.

LFS 5.0  -> BLFS 5.0, 5.01, 5.02, etc
LFS 5.1 -> BLFS 5.1, 5.1.1, 5.1.2, etc

Because we have so many more packages than LFS, we will always need to 
roll the version number at least as fast as LFS.

  -- Bruce

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