add --enable-languages flag to gcc instructions

Jeroen Coumans jeroencoumans at
Fri Jun 6 13:27:55 PDT 2003

Bill's LFS Login wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Jun 2003, Jeroen Coumans wrote:
>>Yes, this is becoming a bit of a FAQ lately. And we all know/assume that
>>FAQ's are mostly due to reader errror/inability/lack of knowledge, they
>>are also a clear indicator of the the book's shortcoming presentation of
> *May be*. We all know that *some* folks can't swallow pablum when you
> put the spoonful of it into their mouth. When a reasonable number of
> folks that have obviously tried to read and digest the book's contents
> have problems, then I agree with you that a flaw in the book's presenta-
> tion may be a cause.
> Just wanted to highlight that judgement about problems of that sort are
> needed before deciding it is a book weakness. Frequency alone is not
> enough. I'll save the risque joke that came to mind just then.

Maybe not just an analysis of the problem but also of the FAQ as an 
entity in and of itself; a collection of frequently encountered problems 
when dealing with LFS and the community. If the book is continuously and 
consistently disregarded or even ignored on certain aspects (like a 
really frequent one; #whynotversion), something is wrong with either the 
book's assumption about it's readers or it's logical presentation of the 
Reasoning from the book's point of view, the FAQ's answers are not in 
the book because the book assumes it's readers follow it to the letter. 
It thus has a rigid structure: _any_ deviation, even something as 
trivial as a minor version number of a package, is a potential problem 
and certainly a FAQ. So reality (and lfs-support) shows us that this 
assumption (fbbg) is actually a dogma which should, IMHO, be adjusted to 
properly reflect the book's audience and the supporting community.
Thus, while the book is written by Gerard, it's also a community effort 
powered by the countless people interacting with it. Perhaps an analysis 
of the people using it is in order to adjust some of the book's 
assumptions. I find it significant that BLFS generates much less FAQ's 
than LFS, while dealing with much more diverse material than LFS. 
Regardless of the numerous other factors which contribute to that (like 
a smaller reader base, the increased knowledge of it's readers wrt.LFS 
etc.), a part of that is also because of the book's structure.

PS - sorry for the rant. Answering a lot of FAQ's does that to you. I 
initially wanted to post to lfs-chat, but this is all about the book's 
future so still relevant here.

Jeroen Coumans

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