5.1 Release Criteria

James Robertson jwrober at linuxfromscratch.org
Wed May 5 09:24:18 PDT 2004


Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Matthew Burgess wrote:
> 
>> On Tue, 4 May 2004 14:04:01 -0600 (MDT)
>> "Nathan Coulson" <conathan at conet.dyndns.org> wrote:
>>  
>>> 2.0.5 is 2.0.4 with the heimdal script in it (AKA, no changes when it
>>> comes to LFS).  It should be added for BLFS's sake.
>>>   
>> Ack, why are BLFS scripts in a LFS-Bootscript tarball?  Sorry if I
>> missed the previous discussion on this, but doesn't it just create an
>> unnecessary dependency between the two projects?
>>
> Nathan,
>  Why not separate the LFS and BLFS scripts.  In the LFS Makefile, put in:
> 
> -include blfs/Makefile
> 
> The dash indicates that make should ignore the file is it can't be found.
> 
> We can place all the BLFS stuff in blfs/Makefile and support files.  The 
> lfs package then only contains the
> main LFS scripts and then we have the users download a separate blfs 
> scripts package, when they get to the BLFS Book,
> that unpacks from the same start point to, say,  
> /usr/src/bootscripts/blfs.  This would also allow the BLFS scripts to 
> stand alone.
> 
> In any case, the LFS instructions need to be expanded to tell the user 
> to keep the bootscripts package around for BLFS.
> 
> Another last thought.  I didn't test it but the include statement might 
> be even better as:
> 
> -include */Makefile
> 
> which allows us to drop new directories into the main bootscripts 
> directory at any time.
> 
>  -- Bruce
> 
OOH, I like this one.  Kind of like the linuxthtreads add-on to Glibc. 
I was worried about the split.  I liked them together in one piece. 
This is a great compromise.

James



More information about the lfs-dev mailing list