lfs bugs and/or changes

Oliver Brakmann obrakmann at gmx.net
Sun May 18 04:31:05 PDT 2003


On Sat, 2003-05-17 15:44, James Iwanek wrote...
> > I believe "make config && make update" is enough to do things properly,
> > the make invoked is not needed in my testing.
> 
> that is because make update calls make
> 
> its the same on almost every program using makefiles (recursive targets)
> it dosnt mean that we should drop the `make` tho

Exactly. If we did, we'd compile everything as root, which is a no-no, as
far as I'm concerned. (Of course, a trojan horse could still be hidden in
the `install' target of the Makefile, but that's no reason to just build
everything as root, anyway, is it?)

Bye,
Oliver
-- 
/"\   ASCII Ribbon   | Reg. Linux User #198843            http://counter.li.org
\ /    Campaign -    | Reg.  LFS  User  #3082       http://linuxfromscratch.org
 x    Against HTML   |
/ \ in mail and news | NP: Within Temptation - The promise
-- 
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 mailing list