Make bootscripts more POSIX compliant

Dan Nicholson dbn.lists at
Fri Feb 23 09:56:49 PST 2007

On 2/21/07, Matthew Burgess <matthew at> wrote:
> 2. Parallel bootscripts.  Whilst the benefits and drawbacks of doing this are
> unclear at the moment (or at least I think they are), I'm all for having
> these worked on until such a point where folks interested in it can come to
> the list with a hard-sell on why LFS should integrate them :-)  If DJ and
> everyone else are happy with having them in contrib, that's fine by me.  If
> you'd rather have a svn branch set up, just holler and it'll be yours.

I'd like to put these in a branch, lsb-bootscripts or something. I'd
think there'd be more people hammering on them if there was a branch.
Anyone interested?


More information about the lfs-dev mailing list