Version number of next LFS release

Timothy Bauscher timothy at
Wed Jan 15 19:28:24 PST 2003

On Wed, Jan 15, 2003 at 08:50:44PM -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> 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.<snip>
> Because we have so many more packages than LFS, we will always need to 
> roll the version number at least as fast as LFS.

Matching version numbers doesn't seem worth the effort involved.
Would releases have to be coordinated between both projects?
Would one project suffer if the other is moving too {fast,slow}?

In my opinion, information about which LFS a BLFS book is
targeted towards would fit best on a page, not a version


-*- "Share and Enjoy" || "Go stick your head in a pig" -*-
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