Robert Daniels wrote: > On Friday 07 March 2008 10:07:46 Randy McMurchy wrote: >> I'm not a big fan of this as it sort of implies we support (have >> tested) newer versions than what the book has in it. Additionally, >> there are so many minor nuances (Moz packages might be an >> exception as they normally don't require command changes) that >> things could be a bit different (doc creation, test suites, >> installed files, etc.). >> > I am in agreement with this. I believe I said this elsewhere, but I > can't find the message right now. What BLFS provides is instructions > known to work with a specific version of a package. The user is > welcome to try the same instructions on a later version of the package. > It will likely work, but we have not tested it and can therefore make > no guarantees.
Well, the new instructions I am working on for autofs will pull an arbitrary number of patches from kernel.org and build with those: Recommended Patches: There are frequent patches issued for autofs. To get the current patches, start in the same directory as the main tar file and run: wget http://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/daemons/autofs/v5/patch_order-5.0.3 && sed 's;autofs;http://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/daemons/autofs/v5/autofs;' patch_order-5.0.3 > wget-list && wget -i wget-list for f in `cat ../patch_order-5.0.3`; do patch -Np1 -i ../$f done That's the way they distribute patches instead of rolling the version. They've had 15 patches since 14-Jan-2008. Of course when they do roll the version, the book will need to change, but technically, I'm relying on the upstream devs to get the patches right. If they put in a new patch, technically I haven't tested it, but I'll rely on bug reports if there is a problem. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page