Alexander E. Patrakov wrote these words on 05/09/08 01:10 CST: > And do we really need to get 6.3 out of the door? Essentially, without an > errata > page, without the team tracking security issues and bugs, it will be just a > snapshot, not a proper distro release. Maybe versionless BLFS (i.e., "always > use > svn") is the way to go?
I'd say for those building LFS Development, using BLFS SVN is a must. And Alex's proposal is legitimate for this. But I have read many support questions, some even very recent, from folks building LFS-6.3, and in a month, BLFS-SVN would not work for them for many of the packages. And it could turn out frustrating for folks that follow the BLFS SVN book on top of LFS-6.3 and 100 packages later discover that there is incompatibility with one or more packages that prevent him/her from achieving the initial goal. I do not want to get into a situation where if someone follows LFS stable, we need to tell them to pull SVN sources from XYZ day and render it yourself in order to find a combination of packages that is compatible with one-another. -- Randy rmlscsi: [bogomips 1003.22] [GNU ld version 2.16.1] [gcc (GCC) 4.0.3] [GNU C Library stable release version 2.3.6] [Linux 2.6.14.3 i686] 04:55:00 up 81 days, 19:43, 1 user, load average: 0.08, 0.22, 0.16 -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
