Randy McMurchy wrote: > Update, update, update. Let's everyone get on the ball. Send in > patches and recommendations. Keep the flow of information coming.
My suggestion is to try to look at the base libraries first. They have the fewest dependencies, although there are cases of circular dependencies and are generally the easiest to build. Updating those may break older apps that depend on the libraries, but they will generally have newer releases pending that will fix those problems. I think we do need to mark each package with some sort of indication about when it was last reviewed. We do have a Last updated on: tag, but that's not always the best indication because it is automatically updated for things like whitespace changes. The exact method of doing this mark is not really important. I like the suggestion made earlier to add a line to each package with "Last checked against LFS 6.5", possibly within the introduction of the package -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
