On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 21:06:11 +0000 Matt Burgess <matt...@linuxfromscratch.org> wrote:
> Hi, > > I'm tackling #3002 (upgrading Util-Linux to 2.21). Bruce suggested the > use of '--enable-new-mount' so that we will use the new libmount based > version of 'mount'. It's marked as EXPERIMENTAL in configure's help, > but I'm happy enough to put it in as Util-Linux is now well maintained > and I fully expect that it will be moved from EXPERIMENTAL before the > next LFS release. > > That led me to wonder why we bother passing the other '--enable' options > (partx, arch and write). For reference, Bruce brought up 'arch' in > http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/pipermail/lfs-dev/2012-February/065811.html > and partx/write are discussed in > http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/pipermail/lfs-dev/2008-October/061763.html. > > My feelings on these are that we should use upstream's defaults wherever > possible, and only diverge from them when absolutely necessary. > > So, based on that, I'd suggest the following change to Util-Linux's > configure invocation: > > Current: ./configure --enable-arch --enable-partx --enable-write > New: ./configure --enable-new-mount > > This would also require a change to coreutils' instructions to build its > version of 'arch'. > > Aside from Alexander's somewhat contrived example of `dd`ing a disk > image and having to invoke `partx` to inform the kernel about the > partitions contained within it, I can't figure out when else I'd need to > use the partx utilities. > > As for 'write', I think its such a niche utility that those that know > they need it can build/install it under "your distro, your rules". > > Thoughts? Looks like a good plan. Thanks Andy -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
