Bruce Dubbs wrote:
I strongly urge the criterion number one to read: 1) If a device needs packages outside those installed by LFS or BLFS then don't include a rule for it. BLFS assumes the user has a base LFS system. Don't make a lot of work for us for some exotic minimalism principle.
Again, I think I'd have to agree with this sentiment. BLFS and LFS have always been treated as separate entities, which of course they are. However they are inter-dependant. It's easy to see that BLFS needs LFS (it wouldn't exist without it) but LFS does need BLFS, too. Without BLFS there wouldn't be much point behind LFS besides the intellectual stimulus.
The two projects should try to work a little closer together than they have in the past, IMO, and intertwine themselves a little more fluidly - they have after all the same general goal: to provide a user the ability to customize their Linux system entirely to taste, learning along the way.
So, I don't think it's wise to be too dogmatic in situations like this. Keep the end product in mind and provide a working framework that allows for easy (and correct!) customization. Going back to the housing metaphor, LFS provides the house, the structure including subsystems like electrical, plumbing, hvac, etc. BLFS should only have to worry about decorating and furnishing, setting up appliances, etc.
-- JH -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
