theoldfellow at gmail.com
Sat Feb 3 09:28:16 PST 2007
Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
> liliana.perossa at fastwebnet.it wrote:
>> So a, possible bad or wrong, idea but why not moving file system tools from BLFS
>> (as states the name it's beyond lfs) to LFS (supposing a different fs instead
>> of ext3) ?
> The problem is that this would introduce optional packages to LFS (which is
> traditionally supposed to be linear). However, I think that this is already
> addressed by the following text in the book:
> So maybe it only remains to add a sentence about filesystem support programs
> below that.
> BTW, DIY Linux avoids the problem altogether by installing into a directory
> and not caring about the filesystem at all.<snip>
> complex setups would mean that people try them even if such setups are
> beyond their abilities.
Having read this and thought about it some more, I guess I'd suggest
changing the book to build into a directory, then add some chapters on
moving the built system to a bootable partition - and then making it
This way we can have a simple scheme for the Newbies and Volume
Management or other exotica for the Gurus. This is what I actually do
these days. Your last point is well made, however.
I can't see much advantage to actually building the LFS core on an
exotic filesystem, or maybe I'm missing something - perhaps it's much
faster, for instance.
On the whole, perhaps LFS has it right at the moment, anyone with the
knowledge and desire can easily use the basic instructions - and even
jhalfs - to do whatever they want, but the learners have a safe and
More information about the lfs-dev