Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
>
>> Anyway, that's it. All things considered, it's not that bad. Also,
>> that's it for the hardware I have (currently) available to test with:
>> x86, x86_64, sparc{,64}, and ppc.
>
> I think that's great, but I would not be in favor of putting Sparc stuff
> into LFS. The right place for that, IMO, is CLFS.
Not trying to argue, however, the point of CLFS, strictly speaking, is
cross-building. From any arch, for any arch. They document whatever arch
the developers can build on, but just documenting arch specifics isn't
the main point of the book. It's the difference of build method that is
important to their project. Just as there are advantages to
cross-building, there are advantages to building entirely natively and
many users may prefer to build natively.
Although LFS doesn't currently _support_ building on architectures other
than x86, I don't think it's right to knowingly exclude them, if the
know-how exists. It is after all, Linux From Scratch, not Linux on x86
From Scratch. Also, the _text_ in the book, for as long as I can
recall, has always allowed for building on other architectures, even if
the exact commands didn't. Adding other architectures to the project
increases its value, and quite possibly, its target audience. I don't
think the mainstream distributions would include versions for
architectures like sparc if there wasn't a demand for them.
Anyway, that's my opinion. I'm interested in hearing that of others.
--
JH
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
