Jeremy Huntwork wrote: >Hi Guys, > >I just wanted to report on the status of the alphabetical branch as it >currently stands. For all intents and purposes, I believe it produces a >stable environment. I have built many, many packages on top of it and >it's working wonderfully. I have built my usual base BLFS packages, ie, >wget, subversion, Xorg, libxml2, libxslt, firefox, thunderbird. I've >also built e17 and all of GNOME (I built most of GNOME's optional >dependencies, too, including OpenLDAP). Not one complaint from any >package. I was considering starting on KDE now as well. > >I know some have expressed concerns about changing the package order and >they have suggested doing binary comparisons. I have yet to find out >exactly *how* to do that, so I'd be happy if someone could hit me with a >cluebat. > >Also, Gerard had previously mentioned moving vim up to earlier in the >build (for the sake of convenience.) While I agree it would be >convenient, that doesn't fall into the motivation for the package >re-order, namely alphabetical except for necessary dependencies. We get >by just fine through the course of the LFS build by using cat and sed. >If manual editing is needed at any point, it's possible to switch >terminals on your host and edit a file, or drop in Vim when you want. I >don't agree that it should move to the top of the build for general LFS >instructions. > >Any further thoughts or comments? How does the community feel about >getting these changes into trunk? > >-- >JH > > For binary comparisions you can use cmp, the man page has a lot of information and more info can be found at info cmp.
Personaly, I think vim should be left twords the end, as you said if manual editing is needed they can switch vt/s or even leave the chroot and come back. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
