On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 09:37:24AM -0500, Randy McMurchy wrote: > I agree totally that trying to introduce multilib into LFS would be > very difficult for us right now. I wasn't trying to say we should. In > fact, I probably shouldn't have commented to the thread at all. But I > wasn't sure if the OP was talking Pure-64.
No problem, I understood what you were trying to say. > And now that I think about it some, multilib isn't that difficult for > LFS, it is BLFS where it becomes a total PITA (time-consuming). And that's where we usually hit the trouble, unfortunately. It'll be the same story if/when we try to introduce any sort of PM. Even the addition of x86_64 alone means we have to test the packages on that hardware. (Fortunately, my testing shows that most packages build and behave as expected on x86_64 without modification of build commands.) But I don't think that should hold us back from trying new things. I think our general approach to development may need to be adjusted, though. More on that later... :) -- JH -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
