Purpose of the FAQ
Jörg W Mittag
Joerg.Mittag at Web.De
Wed Jun 2 14:49:05 PDT 2004
Jeroen Coumans wrote:
> Jon said the following on 02-06-2004 01:30:
>> Why not reword the section to have people use the bootcds. There could be a
>> "release" cd that includes the packages tarball and this would resolve all
>> of the issues about a host not meeting requirements. All other distros use
>> CD's as the primary install method. No reason we should not that I can
>> think of.
> LFS is not a distro, it's a book which teaches about the inner workings
> of a Linux system by building one from the source. Thus, while a boot CD
> is a very handy companion, it doesn't serve the primary goal of LFS and
> thus shouldn't be a requirement or assumption.
There's another point (actually two points): mandating boot CDs for building
LFS is suggested in regular intervals on this list and so far nobody of
those who suggested mandating boot CDs have been able to answer these two
1) Who is going to develop, test, maintain and support those 40 or so
different boot CDs needed to support all architectures and sub-architectures
that Linux (and thus LFS) runs on?
2) What do we do about those architectures (like, say, m68k-amiga) where
booting from CD is not even possible?
gtkmm-1.2.10% ./configure --help
--enable-vegetarian The chicken will be a Tofu chicken (see voodoo option)
More information about the lfs-dev