[lfs-dev] New packages in LFS

Armin K. krejzi.lfs at email.com
Fri Oct 6 08:40:30 PDT 2017


On Fri, 2017-10-06 at 17:07 +0200, Thomas Trepl wrote:
> Am Samstag, den 23.09.2017, 17:32 -0500 schrieb Bruce Dubbs:
> > I have added four new packages to LFS: libffi, python3, ninja, and
> > meson. 
> >   Please take a look and let me know of any
> > issues/suggestions/typos
> > etc.
> > 
> > For those who do not render the book themselves, it will be
> > rendered 
> > overnight on the main web site.
> > 
> > I have not changed systemd.  I ask either DJ or renodr to make
> > changes and 
> > test the systemd build using meson/ninja.  There are other packages
> > in 
> > BLFS that can use meson and I suggest we move to that build
> > mechanism
> > as 
> > it seems to be a lot faster and cleaner than autotools based
> > builds.
> > 
> > We will be able to remove libffi from BLFS and meson will not be
> > needed 
> > there, but python and ninja will still need to remain for
> > additional 
> > optional dependencies.
> > 
> >    -- Bruce
> 
> Hi,
> 
> looks like this packages are only required for systemd. My suggestion
> would be to add this packages only in the systemd-branch in order to
> not "pollute" the sysv-branch; just the same way as systemd itself
> does
> only appear in the systemd branch.
> 
> Since there are many dependencies in Python (bluez, openssl, etc.)
> the
> Python installation here in LFS is only temporary to get the build
> tools meson and ninja running. Since those tools are required more or
> less only for gnome stuff, they need to be built anyhow, but only if
> systemd/gnome stuff is required. If they are not built in LFS, it
> does
> not cost anything to build them when needed later in BLFS.
> 
> Apropos openssl - there are options in the kernel config which adds a
> dependency to openssl to the kernel. A full featured kernel (like the
> one you get when using Archlinux's config) does not build without
> having openssl installed. With this said, it looks to me more
> important
> to have openssl in the basic tool chain than the ones above (except
> you
> do a systemd build).
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> --
> Thomas 
> 

What you suggested would make blfs books diverge a lot, and that would
make development harder. That's the same reason many packages are in
both books, yet not required by systemv book (gperf, attr, acl, libcap,
expat, xml::parser, etc). You are free to ommit the unnecessary
packages yourself, if you feel the need.


More information about the lfs-dev mailing list