On 13 March 2018 at 16:11, Bruce Dubbs <bruce.du...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 03/13/2018 04:49 AM, Richard Melville wrote: > >> On 8 March 2018 at 17:15, Hazel Russman <hazeldeb...@googlemail.com >> <mailto:hazeldeb...@googlemail.com>> wrote: >> >> On Thu, 8 Mar 2018 10:11:23 -0600 >> Bruce Dubbs <bruce.du...@gmail.com <mailto:bruce.du...@gmail.com>> >> wrote: >> >> > >Ken Moffat wrote: >> > > I admire your optimism that you will be able to build (what I >> assume >> > > is) a desktop system without python2. >> > >> > Hazel, >> > >> > python is mentioned in 176 files in BLFS, but only 42 of those are >> > python3. In any reasonable workstation system, both versions will >> be >> > needed. If you are creating a server of some type (file, web, >> database, >> > mail, etc) you might be able to avoid python2. >> > >> > -- Bruce >> I'll have to install it then, as a graphical desktop is essential. >> But two pythons still looks to me like bloat. In all my previous >> builds, I've been able to avoid python3 altogether. On the other >> hand, I must say I'm impressed with ninja. I built glib yesterday >> and it took only a fraction of the time it used to take using make. >> >> >> Hazel, a little late in replying, I know, but I agree, it is annoying to >> have to install two versions of Python. Of course, the Python Community >> would say that there is only one version of Python now and that is Python 3. >> >> This reminds me of the IPv4/IPv6 issue; IPv6, like Python 3, has been >> around for some considerable time, and yet we are still wedded to IPv4. >> The problem is that, although new and improved versions of software, or >> protocols, are released, it is not possible to force everybody to use >> them. Maybe laziness plays a part, or familiarity with the old, or just >> simple economics. >> > > About IPv6; If you are doing NAT within a local network, IPv4 is just > easier to comprehend. 192.169.12.22 is just easier to understand than > 2600:3c01::f03c:91ff:fe70:25e8 (higgs). > > In addition, some ISPs, at least here in the US, do not offer an IPv6 > address or address range. The situation is even worse here in the UK with very few ISPs offering IPv6. We were lucky enough to find a good ISP that gave us a /48 IPv6 block. This enabled us to create a pure IPv6 network and use a NAT64 translator (https://www.jool.mx/en/index.html) to access the Web, which, of course, is still predominantly only IPv4 aware. Having such a large IPv6 block (~ 1.2 septillion addresses) we didn't need NAT in the traditional sense. Richard
-- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page Do not top post on this list. A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style
