Randy McMurchy wrote: > I don't see the need to change the build order when absolutely nothing > is gained from it, and there is a possibility of some subtle breakage > down the road.
I don't think we gain nothing from it. What we gain is knowing why each package is built in the order it is. This is more than just changing the order, it's also going to be documenting what each package depends on. LFS has changed since the order was first decided years ago. Packages have been added and removed. What we have now is a hodge-podge of packages that work, but no-one knows exactly why it works (or at least, it isn't documented fully.) This, IMHO, is a necessary step for LFS to be considered technically accurate. -- JH -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
