On 1/27/07, Nadav Vinik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The LFS book use in paches in order to build full system since the > orginal parts of linux system apparently don't realy work together.
It's not really documented, but we try to when the patches are applicable upstream. Some patches are specific to building LFS, like the GCC specs patch in Chapter 5. We're building GCC in a special way that's not relevant to the GCC developers. Some of the patches are from the original projects. They're just not released yet, or from newer releases than we're using. We call these backports. This includes something like the module-init-tools patch. Some of the patches are specific to the way that we're trying to build LFS. Submitting them back to the developers might not be worthwhile since it's not the general consensus that the patch is the right way to go. A lot of the UTF-8 fixes fall into this category. Sometimes they've been actually rejected by the developers. Sometimes, the upstream project is dead, and applying certain patches is just an accepted part of building a package since there's no place for the patches to get submitted to. I don't think this happens much in the LFS projects since if an upstream project is dead, we usually try to find a new active project. We try to submit the useful patches back upstream. Sometimes they're ignored or rejected, though. This is no different than any other distribution. It can actually be very hard to take all the suggestions from different parties and find a common fix that works for everyone. Hope that explains things a bit. -- Dan -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
