5.1 Release Criteria
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?
> 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.
More information about the lfs-dev