archaic at linuxfromscratch.org
Mon Jul 12 18:13:57 PDT 2004
On Mon, Jul 12, 2004 at 03:35:04PM -0700, Jeremy Utley wrote:
> 1) The Jeroen/Archaic camp - Slower developement, making sure that
> things are always stable, even if we're not leading the pack in
> incorporating new things
I'm NOT taking offense to the above statement, but I would like the
statement to be a bit more expanded to reflect a fuller perspective.
There are only two things that I can think of that I opposed with
BE-LFS. The first was udev/hotplug, the second was (and still is)
readline. My opposition to the former was quickly vanquished as I
learned more about the goals of the kernel developers. I haven't spoken
on the topic of inclusion/exclusion since it first began.
Readline, however, doesn't even fit into this discussion because it has
nothing to do with anything new, or bleeding-edge. Nor does opposition
to it have anything to do with why LFS 6 would be a major version
I've never argued a newer gcc, glibc (NPTL), binutils. The only thing I
recall saying about the kernel is to not stick 2.6.0 in stable. I am
rebuilding some of my systems now, and when that is finished, I fully
intend to test the 6.0 builds for both personal enjoyment/education as
well as to provide worthwhile feedback to the testing team.
My development path most certainly is different. It is conservative. I
build production servers. But I have never tried to stop development on
the book. I actually enjoy the 3 tier model because it keeps people that
want to play on the edge happy with something fun to do. Have at it, I
say. When it hits testing, I'll gladly jump in and help test (due mainly
to the fact that I don't have time to play with unstable). I like the
new flashy stuff, but I rely on the solid stable, and
perfectly-adequate-for-my-needs older stuff. But hey, at least I'm not
running LFS 3 or 4 still like some people. :)
Jeremy, we've certainly had our disagreements in the past, but never was
my intention or desire based on anything personal, nor will I leave
because packages are added that I don't agree with. I build my systems
one way, and advocate another way for the book knowing full well, that
many of the differences are personally selective and not applicable to
all. I try to keep the whole picture in focus at all times. And anyone
who has access to belgarath will see that Gerard also wrote one thing
applicable to all, and built another applicable to him.
As far as Zack goes, while I only know the stuff that has taken place on
the lists, I do know a (paraphrased) statement like [I won't allow
readline to be removed] is clearly a statement of negative attitude and
attitude is likely a bigger reason for conflict than design ideals.
"Rightful liberty is unobstructed action, according to our will, within
limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others."
- Thomas Jefferson
More information about the lfs-dev