Le 09/06/2014 16:57, BLFS Trac a écrit : > #5128: eudev-1.7 > -------------------------+------------------------------ > Reporter: fo | Owner: pierre.labastie > Type: enhancement | Status: closed > Priority: normal | Milestone: 7.6 > Component: BOOK | Version: SVN > Severity: normal | Resolution: fixed > Keywords: | > -------------------------+------------------------------ > > Comment (by fo): > > Thanks for the update. > > The problem is that the objective of the page is not to install eudev, but > to add new features to the installed one, needed for some BLFS packages > and which could not be included in LFS, due to the lack of dependencies. > This was pointed out to you by Bruce, who also agreed with me about the > difference betwenn LFS (installed) and BLFS (eventually newer) eudev > versions. > > Replying to [comment:4 pierre.labastie]: > > To test upgrading, I have built LFS SVN-20140527 (with eudev-1.6), on a > virtual machine with an LVM disk. > > Had some difficulties with the initramfs (udevd is back to /sbin...) > > The upgraded to eudev-1.7 > > So, you built a vm just for this upgrade. > > > Everything seems to run smoothly, but I do not have much (virtual) > harware (one NIC, one graphic card). > > In the past, before systemd broke udev, I used to upgrade udev (I think > you can find it in the archives, some dev wrote I was "very courageous" or > something like that). Only once had a problem, IIRC. For the book, due to > the responsibility, I did not want to do what once and, after your note, > still today was not supposed to be done. > > Not being a page for installing a package, but having a page to update is > just a waist of time, already spent in LFS. > > Also, I do not want to have the responsibility to eventually induce a > breakage in a user system. > > > All in all, I left the title as it was, but kept the version in the > tarball name, adding a note about > > upgrading. > > Adding one note about potential problems is another demonstration that the > book's page should be reversed to the old style. > > One question you posed was if anybody had done it before, and at least > Bruce wrote that he didn't, and it was a response, although not direct. > > I don't think that building a LFS just to update eudev is worth the > trouble, and I certainly will never do it, and doubt any other developer > but you would. > > Therefore, I will reverse the page to the old style, > > Thanks, anyway. > I do not really understand your answer: what Bruce wrote (maybe I missed some other mails, because I do not receive his mails too), was that he did not want to change the title. He did not tell he wanted the page back to the old style, or maybe I did not understand. But if you really want to change the page, please ask Bruce first, this is his layout, not mine...
Pierre -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-book FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
