-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Randy McMurchy wrote: > Guy Dalziel wrote these words on 08/01/09 08:06 CST: >> On Sat, Aug 01, 2009 at 10:49:24PM +1000, Wayne Blaszczyk wrote: >>> I thought it would be easier to follow a set of commands rather than a >>> descriptive sentence (if you had the choice between two). >> However, >> at the end of the day Randy has the final word, and if he says we should >> cater for auto-build then we will. > > Here's my take. It doesn't matter. However, there is a caveat to that. > > Once instructions are in place (and work properly) authored by one > Editor, I look at it as rude to just go behind him and change the > instructions. I will do this from time to time, but typically to fix > typos and such. > > What I've always done in the past is let the community decide. For > example, if it were me, instead of just going and making changes to > instructions that were perfectly fine, I'd write a note to -dev saying, > "I think we should change the instructions in the xyz package to > (insert change here) as (insert explanation here)." > > Then, see what type of input the community gives. > > And, for the record, because I feel it is impossible to automate BLFS, > (there are just too many options), using the reasoning of "it makes for > better automation" doesn't fly the way I see things. Others may look at > it differently. > > Mostly, I don't want to be a dictator or final authority unless there > is something that the community cannot decide on or the community is > 50/50 about something. > Sorry if I offended anyone but I was going by your example of fixing up various bits. The reason why I looked into this package is because it was not working properly for me. The cp command was failing and as it turned out, the wordml directory did not exist, so I fixed this and thought I would add in the tar command based on the other packages. Can I please get a clarification on what can be changed on the fly, and what needs to be consulted with the group before making a change. I don't want to offend anyone. In Regards to automation, I don't think it is impossible to automate BLFS. I personally use an auto build script,and although it's not 100%. i.e. I have a separate properties file that keeps some missing meta data, it does the job. Regards, Wayne. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFKdFDQhfgHoRhX2wIRAogJAJsEPtDHyn6mQege+e6Lw/D7APRIDQCg4DS2 QvDRe6w+3/NR/a8t2mvjXJc= =yC2+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-book FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
