Guys and gals, Is there any real desire to support the optional installation prefixes of X, QT, Gnome, and KDE in the book after package management enters? Maybe I'm just being lazy, but at this point, I kinda view it as an unnecessary maintenance burden. Not to mention that the idea of building Gnome and various groups of dependents 2 more times is a bit unattractive, (it's scripted after the first run so it's not like it's a huge pile of work, just takes background time). That's probably even extreme as I chose to do the most difficult pattern first. The minor changes needed for this variant aren't likely to affect the other 3 possible combinations, but I'll do at least the easy one once anyway for validation.
I imagine the same difficulty occurs with maintaining QT, KDE, and later KDE-4. I'm not sure about supporting both KDE-3 and KDE-4. AFAIK, our counterparts all install in /usr. With package management coming, it shouldn't be any more difficult I suppose, but even more unnecessary IMO now that I actually use what I consider to be a good package management scheme. The only downside I see to dropping optional prefixes, is our value to upstream in not revealing bugs in configure scripts that might affect someone else. AFAIK, we've always been good at finding the out of the ordinary bugs and upstreaming patches or docs. Anyway, a comment tonight on a ticket prompted me to bring it up. Probably targeted toward the 7.0 line once the package management instructions are being worked in. -- DJ Lucas -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content, and is believed to be clean. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
