LFS-6.0 print process

DJ Lucas dj at linuxfromscratch.org
Wed Jul 7 20:27:49 PDT 2004


Ian Molton wrote:

> Im using unstable too and its very nice.
> 
> but thats not the point. why dont we just ditch testing altogether if we're going to do it this way?

I agree with your questioning this, but I hope I missed the sarcasm that 
was intended.  IMO going forward, LFS really should take advantage of 
the three tier model as was originally proposed.  Backing out changes in 
unstable for a testing branch is not correct IMO.  I'll hold my opinion 
on hotplug, but if hotplug was never deemed relatively stable, then it 
never should've touched testing.  That is the whole point of the 
unstable branch!  I still never understood out why b6_0 was dropped.  I 
can only _guess_ that the changes between b6_0 and the fairly well 
tested BE-LFS were too great, and that given the interest in BE, testing 
for stability had already happened for the most part.

-- DJ Lucas



More information about the lfs-dev mailing list