Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
> On Sep 2, 2011, at 1:27 AM, DJ Lucas <d...@linuxfromscratch.org> wrote:
> 
>> I believe complexity was the main objection.
> 
> Seriously? What complexity? I'm sorry but LFS is a complex book for
> advanced Linux users. We're really going to run away from a set of
> shell scripts because we can't be bothered to read them?  (they're
> actually very straightforward if you just go through them)
> 
> But time and effort will be spent solving problems in the existing
> scripts that have already been discussed and resolved in the LSBs.
> 
> Sorry, but objection of complexity is both ridiculous and hysterical.

Complexity was not the reason I rewrote the scripts.  I didn't want to 
add initd-tools to LFS, although I did add it to BLFS.  I made the 
scripts LSB compatible, but didn't use the initd-tools to install them.

I also didn't like the network layout.  I moved ifup/ifdown to /sbin and 
created /lib/boot for bootscript use (e.g. network service scripts).  I 
got rid of /etc/sysconfig/rc because I thought it gave a level of 
indirection for no perceived benefit.  I changed the network 
configuration files to something I thought was more sane that didn't 
depend on directory structure/directory names.

I also added /run as a top level directory, mounted a tmpfs there, and 
use it for /var/{run,lock,shm} and a place for bootscript messages 
(/var/run/bootlog) available after the 3rd line of the 1st script.

I started all this in early July.  The initial commit was #9574 on Aug 
1.  There really have been very few comments, positive or negative, 
until now (after -rc1 has been released), but I guess that's one purpose 
of an rc release.

   -- Bruce
-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Reply via email to