{B,C}LFS State of Things (was Re: SVN-20070706: ...)

[Jeremy Huntwork]

Randy McMurchy wrote:
> I ditto these sentiments. Jeez, Jeremy, why invent the wheel?

Actually, I was trying to avoid that. The simple fact is that I rarely 
consult DIY. For reference, I looked at what I was already familiar 
with: CLFS. I didn't even remember that DIY had a native x86_64 build 
until after I already started my edits on my working copy.

If there's a better method (one that is a closer fit to what we want to 
achieve in LFS) from DIY, great. Let's use it.

> Besides, wouldn't your efforts be better spent getting LFS-6.3 out
> the door, instead of trying to incorporate into LFS (the hard way)
> what everyone has access to using already discovered methodology?

[snip]

> Just my opinion. Don't answer the question, nor comment if there's
> nothing to be gained technically.

If there's nothing to be gained technically, why ask the question?

> knowledge. Just not at the expense of putting into LFS what is
> already out there, with your deviations.

That's what bringing x86_64 into LFS would be - adding what has already 
been done with deviations appropriate for our BOOK/community. I'm not at 
all trying to make this about me, so it's not *my* deviations. The only 
reason I was the one to create the branch and start dropping in changes 
is because I was hoping to create a full 64-bit LiveCD. It would be very 
useful to me personally and at work, and we've had a few requests for 
such a CD on the livecd list.

Am I free to use my time in that manner?

BTW, how does this happen? How does it work out that I get attacked for 
my efforts? I created a branch *specifically* as an out of the way place 
where if I mess it up, no harm is done. I freely admit through all of my 
messages and commits that there may be errors to what is there. I ask 
for suggestions, and I try to show that I'm open to other methods and am 
willing to adjust. And yet people blast me for what I'm doing? What gives?

--
JH