Randy McMurchy wrote: > > To me, even more reason to ditch the old compiler. My understanding > is that this is a Linux From Scratch project. Providing support for > non-free binary packages doesn't fall into the project's goals. > > Perhaps, I'm being too short-sighted, but providing support for > non-free binary packages just seems like something we could avoid > and still meet the project's goals. >
I've always thought of BLFS as a way to guide your LFS to a particular purpose (other than being able to rebuild itself). I don't particularly care about non-free, proprietary, binary-only etc. as far as the book is concerned. I do look for availible source code where possible, but it's not always possible to find an open alternative. Yeah yeah, find another goal! ;-) Take the binary A/V codecs that are used in the book for instance...though they don't have anything to do with gcc-3.3. As far as gcc-3.3 deps are concerned, replacements will be here soon, or at least lets hope so after a year of 3.4! (yeah really it's been just over a year) Right now maintenance is not a real issue and it appears to be helping some, so I'd say leave it in for at least untill time when a hint can be written and a note placed in the book...or better, the version specific hint is updated, though AFAIK it hasn't changed except for version numbers....but that would put the note in chapter 6 (7?) of LFS, not in BLFS. -- DJ Lucas -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
