Greg Schafer wrote: > On Thu, 01 Mar 2012 16:27:31 -0500, Jeremy Huntwork wrote: > >> And that's it. It's cleaner, more direct, and more closely tracks what >> upstream has provided. > > I'm sorry to say this but your whole premise is based on hearsay and > personal opinion. > > Instead of vague assertions about "upstream intentions" and the like, I'd > really appreciate it (if you are going to meddle with the toolchain build > method) that you at least do what I have done for years and offer > detailed analysis and testing and full explanation so the rest of us can > decipher what the hell you're up to. So far you haven't quite > demonstrated you fully understand the changes you are proposing. > > It's been clear over the years that not many folks within LFS have the > interest, knowledge, skills etc to do the heavy lifting when it comes to > build method matters. This needs to change and there needs to be more > experienced eyeballs on these kinds of proposed changes so that they > don't sneak through without proper scrutiny. > > I'm way out of date, out of form, and short on time but I'll try to > debunk some of your incorrect assertions as soon as I get the chance.
Greg, I don't really have any problem with what you are saying, but the way you say it really sucks. Very few people have the time to develop the knowledge you have and I, for one, am interested in your technical opinions, but insults are not called for. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
