Bruce Dubbs bdubbs at
Mon May 17 19:45:09 PDT 2004

Kevin P. Fleming wrote:

> Jeroen Coumans wrote:
>> That's exactly true. If we can't build LFS-6.0 from LFS-5.1 (or 
>> LFS-5.0 for that matter), then it shouldn't be LFS-6.0.
> You _can_ build LFS-6.0 from LFS-5.1 or LFS-5.0. You just have to 
> upgrade your kernel, which people (our target audience) already do. If 
> they built LFS-5.0, are you expecting that they have never upgraded 
> their kernel beyond the 2.4.22 that was in that book?
> Upgrading an existing host to run the 2.6 kernel is not at all 
> difficult, unless people (especially LFS users) are using a 
> configuration that absolutely _requires_ module support (like a 
> strange initrd or something). If they are using a configuration like 
> that, they are going to run into problems booting their new LFS system 
> anyway, unless they know how to deal with those issues. If they know 
> how to deal with those issues, they can upgrade their host to a 
> (non-modular) 2.6 kernel.
> In fact, upgrading their system to a 2.6 kernel before they start 
> their LFS build is actually a very good thing, IMHO, because they will 
> find out very early on whether their system has any trouble with the 
> 2.6 kernel series. If it does, they did not waste their time building 
> a complete system only to find out they can't use it.
> Finally, the availability of one or two (if not more) LFS-6.0 capable 
> boot CDs makes this even easier to deal with; if they don't want to 
> modify their host, they don't have to.

If this is the case, then specific kernel build instructions like those 
in Chapter 8 need to be in the beginning of Chapter 5, or perhaps put 
all the way forward to Chapter 4, Final Preparations.

  -- Bruce

More information about the lfs-dev mailing list