Paul Rogers wrote:
"What I meant was" given Modular XOrg allows various packages to be
updated independently, at any particular point in time the upstream
package list may well be different than as in the BLFS book.
Incorrect. The packages are updated daily for -dev and the stable
releases are there. Since you are doing an odd build based on years
old packages, I think you are using a version of BLFS that is old, but
not a stable release. We did not do BLFS stable between 6.3 and
7.5 but all
True, I used an old development version of BLFS with contemporaneous
package versions that were relevant at the time, but beside the point.
And that's quite a long jump, between 6.3 &
7.5 don't you think?
I was working at a real, income producing, job at the time. Without
If you stay with stable versions of the book at versions 7.5 and
later, the packages are there. If not, you get to figure it out. You
may be able to find the versions you want in conglomeration/.
But they won't be if all the LO, etc., packages as used in the book
aren't captured but left to the policies of the upstream sources. What
guarantees do we have that what the build script fetches whenever that
happens has any correlation to the version of the book being used? I
thought that was the point under discussion. Is there some way I could
be clearer about this?
I did keep everything that was downloaded during/for the LO, OJDK,
XOrg, etc., builds. Burning a couple copies on DVDs is easy and
negligibly expensive. If it comes to it, I could rebuild this system
from scratch without requiring anything from upstream. That's another
form of security.
Yes, LO is an exception. However the others are complete AFAIK.
-- Bruce
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
