Archaic wrote these words on 01/05/06 16:25 CST: > His instructions may work very well, but it won't support a big > piece of functionality. Does this help us any? How much time will be > needed to verify prior to inclusion into the book? Will it be > considerably less than what it takes now to build and test instructions? > Again, I don't know, u8ust throwing out some thoughts and wondering why > people aren't writing hints or patches, or even emails if they have this > info ready to go.
We are kind of doing this now with the new page in BLFS for the locale related issues. However, as the i18n support becomes more intense, or complex, are there any BFLS Editors who are *qualified* to verify this work. Are there any BFLS Editors *qualified* to check out multilib instructions? It may be that the answer to both questions is 'no'. And in that case, what it comes down to is, is *some* information (from what we hope is a reliable source) better than nothing? This is what we're driving at. That the guys who can provide some valid information that can help others, put this information up somewhere *right now*, and not wait for some BLFS Editor to review, or worse, try and learn the information before it is made available. My thoughts anyway. -- Randy rmlscsi: [GNU ld version 2.15.94.0.2 20041220] [gcc (GCC) 3.4.3] [GNU C Library stable release version 2.3.4] [Linux 2.6.10 i686] 16:39:00 up 103 days, 2:03, 3 users, load average: 0.33, 0.23, 0.29 -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
