An idea for a new development model

[Randy McMurchy]

Jeremy Huntwork wrote these words on 08/15/07 12:06 CST:

> By the same token, once you get past the initial work of adding the PM
> framework to BLFS, it might make developing and testing BLFS a whole lot
> easier, simply because of the nature of package managment. But, you're
> more qualified to speak on whether that's the case than I am.

I (and I believe Dan as well, that I know of), already use a DESTDIR
approach. I don't believe in doing otherwise with unknown packages.
Not doing it exposes you to a multitude of bad things.

I realize I'm making a case for using it saying the above, however,
I don't feel we need to push it onto users. Merely suggesting it,
*and letting the reader make the choice to do it or not*, should
be more than ample. The readers should take for granted our
instructions have been scrutinized and tested, and they should
feel confident these "bad things" won't happen.

-- 
Randy

rmlscsi: [bogomips 1003.26] [GNU ld version 2.16.1] [gcc (GCC) 4.0.3]
[GNU C Library stable release version 2.3.6] [Linux 2.6.14.3 i686]
12:33:01 up 13 days, 12:24, 1 user, load average: 0.75, 0.18, 0.10