Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
I know George M (gmak) has done some great concept work with regards to parsing the book with Bash alone. While I think this is great work, I think the focus of any research in this line should be done in C and get the alfs coding moving forward. jhalfs is good as an in-the-meantime tool and while it could benefit from a bash-only parser, it doesn't really *need* it at the moment.
It is does seem like something very cool, I haven't had a chance to play with it, but on the surface it is very impressive.
I hesitated to say anything more about this to George because I didn't want to discourage his work, he's done some great stuff so far. But now that you've brought this up, Thomas, I think any further concept code and energy should, if at all possible, be directed toward alfs.
I couldn't agree more.
To that end, unless George M. (or someone else) steps up to start really moving on the alfs code, I can start spending any LFS time I have on it. (This would necessarily mean that I'd have to temporarily neglect any other fields, like LFS or LiveCD development.) Being that I'm at best only an amateur with C, I'd gladly jump to second or third place behind a more knowledgeable and energetic programmer. If I'm left to myself, I'll probably move along slowly, but I'll do my best to keep the list informed of any ideas/progress/road-blocks.
Please only do so if you really feel you want to, I don't necessarily want to see you neglect other things just for ALFS. But I leave that decision to you.
Thomas -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/alfs-discuss FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
