What is LFS anyway?

Archaic archaic at indy.rr.com
Mon May 10 10:57:37 PDT 2004

On Sun, May 09, 2004 at 12:51:19AM -0700, jeremy at jutley.org wrote:
> =
> > Also, does the 2.6 kernel require udev?  Would it not be safer to stick
> > with static devs (as backup in case something screws up) and link to a
> > udev hint that puts the bare essentials (like hotplug) in it thus
> > satisfying all users with instructions to their needs/desires?
> >
> Here we go, living in the fscking dark ages again!  It's time to move on -
> udev is here to stay - 2.6 may not require it, but 2.7 will.
> I'm so sick and fscking tired of people trying to stifle progress!

You are out of line, Jeremy. I did not flame. I did not try to stifle
progress. All I did was ask questions to which you provided only insult,
not answers.


All governments are more or less combinations against the people. . .and
as rulers have no more virtue than the ruled. . .  the power of
government can only be kept within its constituted bounds by the display
of a power equal to itself, the collected sentiment of the people.

- Benjamin Franklin Bache, in a Philadelphia Aurora editorial 1794

More information about the lfs-dev mailing list