> For a server, I doubt there is very much commonality. But, 1) the newbie isn't very likely to be asking how to build a server, and 2) even so there are security and manageability tools that would be common to a client, e.g. log management, networking & firewalls.
> For a desktop I suspect the common packages stop fairly soon after > building Xorg. For myself, getting my preferred wm is basically > followed by firefox with system libraries. Everything after that, > including printing [ not everyone uses a printer, and not all printers > use the same packages ], is very much down to individual choice. As may be, but, 1) I build a lot of general support stuff before I ever get to Xorg, 2) imagine yourself in the newbie's shoes, rather than the expert you are who knows exactly where he's going and what it takes to get there--(s)he'd like some guidance getting there, and building a "capable" system. Remember we're talking about offering guidance to someone like Mr(s) Oda who can't make sense of the list of packages, can't put the puzzle pieces together, isn't quite sure where (s)he should be going. You're familiar with the book, you work on it! Imagine if it looked like a "maze of twisty little passages, all alike" to you. > Normally, discussing changes to the book is done on -dev. In this > case, since we are discussing guidance for new builders and everyone > on -dev has probably long forgotten what it was like being new here, Exactly so. It has always been the case that experts who have learned all the stuff, and are in a position to provide guidance, have forgotten what it's like being the person needing the guidance. > The one good thing about a hint is that it is dated - dependencies > change over time, what worked for me in September now doesn't work for > all the current versions, or is suboptimal (the 'pysqlite got > downloaded by firefox' discussion). Perhaps, but it doesn't seem like BLFS has, of late, been deciding on stable releases of the book. If it were to do that, then the dependencies should be correct for the stable release. > Yes, I'd agree with that. Broadly speaking, what I think people want > are either specific applications like Firefox which we cover along > with the dependencies, or broader packages like Gnome or KDE which we > cover as entire sections. In what way is the current system not > adequate? Isn't the posting by Mr(s) Oda at the head of this thread evidence enough? > That's not a bad idea, actually - using filesystem monitoring to track > file and directory creation during "make install". Nicer than the old > LD_PRELOAD hacks I used to use, and probably faster than the DESTDIR > approach I use now... Just so as you sit there and watch the console scroll by and don't do anything that's going to change the directories being watched! Get impatient and chaos breaks loose! > Can you suggest some? Because from my point of view, my goal after an > LFS build is to install a desktop, and a scattering of specific > programs to go with it. And that basically means the "X Window" and > "Gnome" sections of the BLFS book, plus the pages for "Firefox", etc, > plus anything listed as a dependency for one of the above. I did in a previous post. q.v. > Your post is somewhat short on examples, so it's a little hard to see > what you're thinking of... See previous answer and previous post. I laid out my own "Eight- fold Path". -- Paul Rogers paulgrog...@fastmail.fm http://www.xprt.net/~pgrogers/ Rogers' Second Law: "Everything you do communicates." (I do not personally endorse any additions after this line. TANSTAAFL :-) -- http://www.fastmail.fm - The professional email service -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
