[RFC] LFS-6.1.1

Bruce Dubbs bdubbs at swbell.net
Fri Oct 14 19:31:27 PDT 2005


Matthew Burgess wrote:
> Ken Moffat wrote:
> 
>> On Sun, 9 Oct 2005, Matthew Burgess wrote:
>>
>>> 4) Do something with the udev configuration vs. /etc/group conflict
>>> reported in bug 1639.
>>
>>
>>  How about the udev version ?  Should we stick with 056 or upgrade it
>> to 070 ?  (I seem to remember that something newer than 056 was needed
>> for newer kernels at some point, but maybe that was only a problem
>> when booting.)
> 
> 
> Well, if we upgrade udev, will that act as a precedent to upgrade all
> the other packages too?  Or is there a particular bug in 056 that you
> want to see fixed in 6.1.1?  I can't remember the exact combinations of
> kernel and udev that play well together/break each other, but I have a
> feeling if we upgrade either, we'd need to upgrade the other too.

My understanding was that 6.1.1 was a bug fix release.  I am in favor of
only updating the minimum number of packages necessary to fix the bugs.
 In my mind, *only* those packages listed in the errata should be
upgraded:  texinfo, perl, util-linux, bzip2, vim, and zlib.

  -- Bruce



More information about the lfs-dev mailing list