weasel at beyondnormal.org
Sun May 23 06:10:20 PDT 2004
On Sun, 2004-05-23 at 11:30 +0200, Jeroen Coumans wrote:
> Nick Fotopoulos said the following on 23-05-2004 07:45:
> > On Sat, 2004-05-22 at 17:14 +0200, Jeroen Coumans wrote:
> >>I'd also like to point out that there were several efforts to
> >>*standardise* our software selection procedure and come up with commonly
> >>agreed upon *principles*, eg.
> >>Despite that everybody applauded and supported the effort, it seems that
> >>it's just theory and the practice is that LFS will just include
> >>everything which its development team wish to include.
> > The funny thing is, those 6 principles don't seem to argue for or
> > against either side of this debate...they are valid for both the current
> > version of the LFS and BE-LFS books. Did I miss something?
> No, they were exactly intended this way - to provide common rules upon
> which both sides can draw objective arguments from!
> If the principles are not adequate, then why attack them? Adjust them!
> It's a wiki and I've invited everyone numerous time to tweak them.
> Please do!
> Jeroen Coumans
Who said they are not adequate? Not I. Did I attack them? Certainly
not. The only thing inadequate that I was attacking, was the argument
that udev/hotplug doesn't fit within the principals, and guidelines.
More information about the lfs-dev