pointless -R on chapter 5 chown?
krisp at wanadoo.nl
Sun Jan 26 06:12:01 PST 2003
> Alex Groenewoud wrote:
> > But why would anyone want to put something in the $LFS/static
> > directory besides the static binaries? And does anyone does
> > this?
> I regularly put my sources under $LFS/static/sources. I can't
> why I got started doing it this way, but it's always worked for
> me, so I
> don't plan to change :)
Well, think again. Otherwise you might one day begin putting the
manpages in $LFS/sbin/man and music files in $LFS/usr/bin/mp3, and
never again get away from it. :)
Of course it works and of course you are free to do whatever you
like, but this doesn't make putting source tarballs in $LFS/static
any less silly. The $LFS/static directory is intended to be thrown
away -- you want to throw away the sources? Or do you first move
them elsewhere, to $LFS/usr/src/system maybe? Why not put them
there right away?
I think it's because the (CVS) book doesn't contain any advice on
where to store the downloaded source balls that readers put them in
the only directory that seems available.
Maybe some even do their building there?
Jeremy Herbison wrote:
> I Personally mount $LFS/static as a separate partition and then
> format it as /home once the system is finished. Therefore
> $LFS/static gets filled with all sorts of things: a copy of the
> LFS book, saved /etc scripts, tarballs, as well as the static
And you throw all this stuff away when you reformat the partition
to be used as /home? Including the sources?
> I say just leave the -R alone, its not that big a deal and
> certainly doesn't hurt anyone.
It's not a big deal, but it hurts my eyes:
useradd -s /bin/bash -m lfs
chown -R lfs $LFS/static
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