Am Dienstag, 27. Juli 2010 06:31 schrieb Jeremy Huntwork: > Hello All, Dear Mr. Huntwork!
> After reading a few requests for the project status on this list (e.g., > http://linuxfromscratch.org/pipermail/livecd/2010-March/005331.html, > http://linuxfromscratch.org/pipermail/livecd/2009-August/005314.html) and a > couple of personal emails, I think I need to bring this subject up to > determine what will happen to this project. There is no need to discuss, because this Project is dead for quite a long while. To be exact, it is dead sind Mr. Partakov was mobbed although he made a perfect CD. Nothing seriouse happened afterwards. So denominating the CD-iso other than dead is ridiculous. > It's important to discuss, > because while we've produced something here that a number of people like > and find useful, there are some pretty large reasons as to why this project > became stagnant. No need for any kind of discussion. The only thing to talk about could be: Who will go on as you don't want to. Not only the usual way. This approach used too long is out. As there is too much progress not considered in any way you should declare JHALFS as dead. Programms used there are to old even for Deban. > Here's some of the main ones: > 1. Maintenance nightmare. The build scripts for the CD just take way too > long, they're very procedural. And their current format makes them > difficult to maintain. (Of course, this may be just the nature of a LiveCD > based on LFS - this is difficult to say.) The whole approach to build a CD is the nightmare, the use of the idea behind is a nightmare, because the scripts are the nightmare. So one should get rid of all of that. > 2. The purpose of _this particular LiveCD and project_ has not been > maintained very clearly. And so the produced CD and many of the decisions > made about it have wandered. This is pure cynism. As far as i can judge, there are quite a lot of people who start using the CD-iso and building archaic LFS just because they want to start with a clean system without using their actual Linux and build an obsolet LFS. This is cynism. Building LFS should guarantee the most updated Linux of all others because this is the only chance of LFS to survive. Also Dipl. Ing. Knopper improved his most famous CD enourmously! > 3. Little real development support from others. Neither myself (nor > Alexander who probably doesn't even associate himself with this project > anymore) have the time or energy to keep this project moving by ourselves. > If people want this CD, they're going to have to help produce it. This is a lie. There have been several efforts to update and none of them ever got a chance. There a better LFS-liveCD in Russia, in Cechoslovakia in Germany and just because you don't know any other language you are saying, there ist little development. There is only little development in the perpetuated LFS-deadCD. But it is ridiculous to call that development. > It comes down to this. If you, the readers of this list and users of this > CD, would like to produce future "official" versions of this CD, you are > going to have to come together to decide two things. There is no need for any offiicality as there are quite interesting liveCDs not at all official, even for building LFS on systems without any Linux and they are modern, faster, more brilliant. The official deadCD is a havy monster not able to move any longer. > 1. What future direction should the CD take and why (i.e., Stated Purpose, > build method, packages included, other features) 2. How are we going to > organize to achieve the answers to question 1? No. Not at all. If Linus would ever had gone that way there wouldn't Linux exist. If LFS woult have started that way, it never would be as it is. So there is no need for officials, official acts, official duties, official air. Ther exists a need for the most modern, the most actual, the most fascinating CD on the world, because only LFS could guarantee it. And for that all the new people coming to LFS only can have the guarantee for building it with the help of that CD. > If we can't answer those two things satisfactorily and put it into action, > then I'm afraid the best thing would really be to shut down the project > completely and officially. You always talk in plural! So I have to emphasize, I am not concerned. If you want to resign just do it and say that clearly. Do resign as the only maintainer, do resign as the only preserver of the grail as so many preservers should do too. The sooner you do so the better you will stay in remembrance With kind regards, Matthias Feichtinger -- Mistakes found could be kept to oneself -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/livecd FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
