Pierre Labastie wrote:
But I think that the book is not coherent. This has been discussed several times
on the list, and never really settled. Either g-i should be always optional (and
the requirements made explicit, maybe for xfce, lxde, or anything which really
needs it), or it should be always recommended, because "/Recommended/ means that
BLFS strongly suggests this package is installed first for a clean and
trouble-free build, that won't have issues either during the build process, or
at run-time. The instructions in the book assume these packages are installed.
Some changes or workarounds may be required if these packages are not
installed." according to "Notes on building software" in Chapter 2. So I
understand that if the builds may fail depending on the order the book is built,
it should be recommended.
What do you think? I think that either g-i should be built early when building a
full book, or should never be built. Three packages seem to require it, so
they'd need to be tested without g-i. But if really it is impossible to build
them without g-i, g-i should be recommended almost everywhere:
Checking my log, I build g-i as number 14 in my list of BLFS packages. I agree
that it should be recommended everywhere.
-- Bruce
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
