Re: Build order rationale page
El Sábado, 15 de Abril de 2006 05:50, Chris Staub escribió: Yeah, I also agree it would be good to eliminate that stuff from the package installation page, and just put it all in one place. The dependency info is useful and important, but it just isn't needed at the time a package is being built. Attached a new POC patch with: - Simplified the appendixc/dependencies.xml tagging, but keeping the same look that in the previous one. - In chapter06 packages files, replaced dependencies list by a link to Appendix C. If that isn't wanted, then the changes to stylesheets/xhtml/lfs-xref.xsl should be reverted. - In chapter05 packages files, the dependencies list should be removed or changed by links to Appendix C. -- Manuel Canales Esparcia Usuario de LFS nº2886: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org LFS en castellano: http://www.escomposlinux.org/lfs-es http://www.lfs-es.com TLDP-ES: http://es.tldp.org dependencies-2.patch.gz Description: GNU Zip compressed data -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Build order rationale page
M.Canales.es wrote: Attached a new POC patch with: - Simplified the appendixc/dependencies.xml tagging, but keeping the same look that in the previous one. - In chapter06 packages files, replaced dependencies list by a link to Appendix C. If that isn't wanted, then the changes to stylesheets/xhtml/lfs-xref.xsl should be reverted. - In chapter05 packages files, the dependencies list should be removed or changed by links to Appendix C. I like this, Manuel. As far as I'm concerned, it's a go. :) -- JH -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Build order rationale page
On Sat, Apr 15, 2006 at 05:05:01PM +0200, M.Canales.es wrote: - Simplified the appendixc/dependencies.xml tagging, but keeping the same look that in the previous one. Looks good. - In chapter06 packages files, replaced dependencies list by a link to Appendix C. If that isn't wanted, then the changes to stylesheets/xhtml/lfs-xref.xsl should be reverted. I think it should be reverted. Seems kinda silly to have an identical link in every package when we can just make a note in the intro material. - In chapter05 packages files, the dependencies list should be removed or changed by links to Appendix C. I would prefer removal. Also, a couple people have commented that special notes should be in special note boxes in the affected package page and not in the Appendix. The note about being non-root is the only example thus far. -- Archaic Want control, education, and security from your operating system? Hardened Linux From Scratch http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/hlfs -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Build order rationale page
El Sábado, 15 de Abril de 2006 17:42, Archaic escribió: I think it should be reverted. Seems kinda silly to have an identical link in every package when we can just make a note in the intro material. Agreed. Adding a good note in chapter06/introduction.xml will make that links redundant. Also, a couple people have commented that special notes should be in special note boxes in the affected package page and not in the Appendix. The note about being non-root is the only example thus far. Well, the POC is about XML/CSS code. The actual text and where each comment should be placed is for technical editors ;-) -- Manuel Canales Esparcia Usuario de LFS nº2886: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org LFS en castellano: http://www.escomposlinux.org/lfs-es http://www.lfs-es.com TLDP-ES: http://es.tldp.org -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Build order rationale page
Bruce Dubbs wrote: I'm not sure what I'm supposed to be seeing on the installation pages for Autoconf and Automake. Perhaps the Test Suite depends? Yeah. The appendix looks good. I do think that the dependencies should be pulled out of the individual packages. No need to duplicate it in Chapter 5 and Chapter 6. Yeah, I'm starting to think that too. However, the notes similar to 'Also note that the destdir test will always be skipped, because it only works for non-root users, and several other tests will be skipped as they depend on packages not installed in LFS' should go in the package sections and not in the dependencies section. I agree there, although I think that is only in the deps. page because Manuel, in creating the patch, was simply copying-and-pasting my comments about dependencies I had made in the ticket. Those notes certainly should go into the installation pages. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Build order rationale page
El Viernes, 14 de Abril de 2006 07:58, Chris Staub escribió: I agree there, although I think that is only in the deps. page because Manuel, in creating the patch, was simply copying-and-pasting my comments about dependencies I had made in the ticket. Those notes certainly should go into the installation pages. Right. Remember that the patch is only a POC. All can be modified if needed. -- Manuel Canales Esparcia Usuario de LFS nº2886: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org LFS en castellano: http://www.escomposlinux.org/lfs-es http://www.lfs-es.com TLDP-ES: http://es.tldp.org -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Build order rationale page
On Fri, Apr 14, 2006 at 04:28:16PM +0200, M.Canales.es wrote: Say to me if you need a new Appendix C template. Manuel, so far everyone has been in agreement that they like the look of it. The only thing mentioned was taking out stuff like notes about being non-root user. As far as the software dependencies and build order notes, I'd say you've already got a winner. -- Archaic Want control, education, and security from your operating system? Hardened Linux From Scratch http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/hlfs -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Build order rationale page
On Fri, Apr 14, 2006 at 10:58:08AM -0400, Jeremy Huntwork wrote: Yes, I think that's the way to go. Have the dependency info only in the appendix and then each package page pulls the info in. Actually, I was thinking that pulling anything in was rather wasted effort. Why should the individual packages list their deps when the exact same info is in the Appendix? -- Archaic Want control, education, and security from your operating system? Hardened Linux From Scratch http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/hlfs -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Build order rationale page
Archaic wrote: On Fri, Apr 14, 2006 at 10:58:08AM -0400, Jeremy Huntwork wrote: Yes, I think that's the way to go. Have the dependency info only in the appendix and then each package page pulls the info in. Actually, I was thinking that pulling anything in was rather wasted effort. Why should the individual packages list their deps when the exact same info is in the Appendix? Well, doesn't matter to me. I just don't want the actual information appearing in the XML sources in more than one place, so if we do want that information in the rendered book in more than one spot, do some includes. -- JH -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Build order rationale page
Jeremy Huntwork wrote: Yes, I think that's the way to go. Have the dependency info only in the appendix and then each package page pulls the info in. Agreed with everything else so far. -- JH That's the way Manuel's patch is now. What he is saying is to change it and *remove* that info entirely from each individual package page. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Build order rationale page
M.Canales.es wrote: Right. Remember that the patch is only a POC. All can be modified if needed. I just now realized what POC means. I feel stupid... :p -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Build order rationale page
Chris Staub wrote: That's the way Manuel's patch is now. What he is saying is to change it and *remove* that info entirely from each individual package page. Gotcha. Sounds fine to me. :) -- JH -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Build order rationale page
El Viernes, 14 de Abril de 2006 17:05, Archaic escribió:
Actually, I was thinking that pulling anything in was rather wasted
effort. Why should the individual packages list their deps when the
exact same info is in the Appendix?
That is wy I'm ofering a new template.
If that is done, the special tagging in Appendix C required to can point the
package filies XIncludes to the proper place inside Appendix C isn't needed.
We could take away of that {formalpara}s and emty {para}s.
--
Manuel Canales Esparcia
Usuario de LFS nº2886: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org
LFS en castellano: http://www.escomposlinux.org/lfs-es http://www.lfs-es.com
TLDP-ES: http://es.tldp.org
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Build order rationale page
Chris Staub wrote: I just now realized what POC means. I feel stupid... :p Hehe, did you think he meant something like 'piece of crap'? ;D -- JH -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Build order rationale page
Jeremy Huntwork wrote: Hehe, did you think he meant something like 'piece of crap'? ;D -- JH *cough*of course not*cough* -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Build order rationale page
M.Canales.es wrote:
That is wy I'm ofering a new template.
If that is done, the special tagging in Appendix C required to can point the
package filies XIncludes to the proper place inside Appendix C isn't needed.
We could take away of that {formalpara}s and emty {para}s.
Yeah, I also agree it would be good to eliminate that stuff from the
package installation page, and just put it all in one place. The
dependency info is useful and important, but it just isn't needed at the
time a package is being built.
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Build order rationale page
Jeremy Huntwork wrote: M.Canales.es wrote: 3) Besides getting the udev_update branch in, this info should be one of the next things to go in so we can finally close http://wiki.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/ticket/684 Chris, what's the current status? What sort of help do you need to get this info in? -- JH Mostly I'm just looking for feedback on what that page should look like. I can certainly put the actual info in...I'm just not sure how it should all look. Is the kind of page I posted earlier (with fewer bulleted lists) good? On second thought, Manuel's patch, that would put all dependency info into a single file and have each individual package page link to a section on the deps. page, seems to look good. I applied it and rendered the result and I already like it. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Build order rationale page
On Fri, Apr 14, 2006 at 01:18:54AM -0400, Chris Staub wrote: Mostly I'm just looking for feedback on what that page should look like. I can certainly put the actual info in...I'm just not sure how it should all look. Is the kind of page I posted earlier (with fewer bulleted lists) good? Yeah, I liked it. On second thought, Manuel's patch, that would put all dependency info into a single file and have each individual package page link to a section on the deps. page, seems to look good. I applied it and rendered the result and I already like it. He is going to commit that patch soon, but if you have a rendered copy online, I'd like to look at it. -- Archaic Want control, education, and security from your operating system? Hardened Linux From Scratch http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/hlfs -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Build order rationale page
Archaic wrote: On second thought, Manuel's patch, that would put all dependency info into a single file and have each individual package page link to a section on the deps. page, seems to look good. I applied it and rendered the result and I already like it. He is going to commit that patch soon, but if you have a rendered copy online, I'd like to look at it. I have it at http://linuxfromscratch.org/~chris/depsupdate/index.html - look at the installation pages for Autoconf and Automake, and the new Appendix C. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Build order rationale page
On Fri, Apr 14, 2006 at 01:28:43AM -0400, Chris Staub wrote: I have it at http://linuxfromscratch.org/~chris/depsupdate/index.html - look at the installation pages for Autoconf and Automake, and the new Appendix C. Appendix C looks great. Is it safe to assume that the install and test deps are going to be pulled out of the individual package pages, then? -- Archaic Want control, education, and security from your operating system? Hardened Linux From Scratch http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/hlfs -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Build order rationale page
Archaic wrote: On Fri, Apr 14, 2006 at 01:28:43AM -0400, Chris Staub wrote: I have it at http://linuxfromscratch.org/~chris/depsupdate/index.html - look at the installation pages for Autoconf and Automake, and the new Appendix C. Appendix C looks great. Is it safe to assume that the install and test deps are going to be pulled out of the individual package pages, then? I'm not sure what I'm supposed to be seeing on the installation pages for Autoconf and Automake. Perhaps the Test Suite depends? The appendix looks good. I do think that the dependencies should be pulled out of the individual packages. No need to duplicate it in Chapter 5 and Chapter 6. However, the notes similar to 'Also note that the destdir test will always be skipped, because it only works for non-root users, and several other tests will be skipped as they depend on packages not installed in LFS' should go in the package sections and not in the dependencies section. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Build order rationale page
M.Canales.es wrote: Some days ago I send to Jeremy a patch with XML templates to describe all that stuff and to add in each package file the testsuite dependencies. Maybe both you should to work on that together ;-) Sorry for not replying on this thread before. A few things: 1) Manuel can you re-send that email? I can't seem to find it right now. I might have deleted it accidentally... :/ 2) I think the page should be in the Appendix - not everyone will need or want to read it. But we should definitely point to it within the main text. Have a paragraph somewhere that stresses the importance of the build order and the need to satisfy dependencies, then 'For more details, see Appendix C' or something of the sort. 3) Besides getting the udev_update branch in, this info should be one of the next things to go in so we can finally close http://wiki.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/ticket/684 Chris, what's the current status? What sort of help do you need to get this info in? -- JH -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Build order rationale page
El Martes, 11 de Abril de 2006 16:55, Jeremy Huntwork escribió: 1) Manuel can you re-send that email? I can't seem to find it right now. I might have deleted it accidentally... :/ Searching it ... 2) I think the page should be in the Appendix - not everyone will need or want to read it. But we should definitely point to it within the main text. Have a paragraph somewhere that stresses the importance of the build order and the need to satisfy dependencies, then 'For more details, see Appendix C' or something of the sort. My first try was an Appendix C, but wasn't able to create a decent output look. Well, I will try again using a different tagging and XSL/CSS code. -- Manuel Canales Esparcia Usuario de LFS nº2886: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org LFS en castellano: http://www.escomposlinux.org/lfs-es http://www.lfs-es.com TLDP-ES: http://es.tldp.org -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Build order rationale page
Dan Nicholson wrote: I think it's useful for anyone. The first time I built the book, it seemed some random collection of utilities (not quite, but you get the point). If this dependency info had been available I think I would have been able to understand the connection of the tools a bit better. -- Dan Your comment about a random collection of utilities reminds me of another ticket I created, about adding an explanation of why each package is in the book - http://wiki.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/ticket/1673. The book does a good job of giving a technical description of what each program does, but for many of them doesn't really say why a user would need that package. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
RE: Build order rationale page
Archaic wrote: I see now what you are saying and agree. However, this sort of information seems most useful to developers and the more highly advanced readers. Perhaps a note should be placed in chap5's intro linking to this advanced information with a caveat that it isn't needed for a regular joe just wanting to build a system. Then place the info at the end of the book. The way I see it, it is sort of like an index of knowledge gained and applicable to development, but not really applicable to following the book to produce a working system. Comments? So far I've only seen 3 other people say anything in this thread. I like seeing everything... :) Perhaps a link to another page with this information would be ok? :) Dave -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Build order rationale page
Chris Staub wrote: I've started working on a page describing the reasoning behind the package build order for LFS. Take a look at it here - http://linuxfromscratch.org/~chris/lfs-book/chapter05/buildorder.html. I'm also updating the dependencies for each package. I think it would be a good idea to separate build deps. from testsuite deps. Anyone agree? -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Build order rationale page
Chris Staub wrote: I've started working on a page describing the reasoning behind the package build order for LFS. Take a look at it here - http://linuxfromscratch.org/~chris/lfs-book/chapter05/buildorder.html. Any comments - page layout, location, etc., are welcome. I don't have much actual information there yet, but it should be enough to give an idea of what it would look like. The lists seem a bit too prominent. I would reword the paragraphs like Coreutils to something like: Coreutils must be installed before Bash and Diffutils because they hard-code Coreutils binary locations. I'm not sure you want to say E2fsprogs must be installed before Util-Linux because it is normally installed that way alphabetically. The alpha order does solve the dependency. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Build order rationale page
Archaic wrote: Some preliminary thoughts: I would probably not go into such detail as if this book is a teaching aide, the above paragraph would bog down and confuse the reader. Some lighter, general reading along the lines of: Some pkgs have circular deps [insert very light blurb as to what a circ. dep is-. This is noted on the appropriate pkg pages. OK, this is probably a better idea, though I would at least like to list all such packages on the buildorder page, just to have all that info in one location. Something like: Some packages have circular dependencies. This includes Autoconf/Automake... I like to think of this page as being just as much of a guide for LFS book editors to make it easier to add/move/delete packages in the future, as for LFS users. The e2fsprogs rationale is superceeded by the fact that E comes before U and should be dropped. I disagree - all such dependencies should be listed regardless of whether they are accounted for by alphabetical order. Part of the reason for documenting this info is to account for the possibility that some package (for example, Util-Linux) could, at some point in the future, be moved up in the order to satisfy some other package deps, and having this info listed here would allow us to know instantly what else (like E2fsprogs) would need to be moved as well. I would drop info about linking because this is just a normal everyday dependency which has been handled since the beginning. The notes on hardcoded paths, however, is very useful knowledge. Just trying to be thorough and have *all* information about packages that are required to be installed in a particular order. Finally, I would either move this page to right after the chap6 intro or add it to the end of the chap6 intro page itself. The discussion of chap5 deps is a different beast. Possibly, though the order of chap. 5 packages is really based on the same rationale (just so happens that it *can* be almost-completely alphabetical), just fewer packages. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Build order rationale page
Bruce Dubbs wrote: The lists seem a bit too prominent. I would reword the paragraphs like Coreutils to something like: Coreutils must be installed before Bash and Diffutils because they hard-code Coreutils binary locations. I don't mind just having a single sentence for listing a couple of dependencies like this, but in a couple instances the list of deps. for a certain package is fairly long. In the case of Coreutils, there are actually several more - I just haven't listed them all yet because I don't want to do too much on this page if I'm not sure I'll be changing the whole format later... I'm not sure you want to say E2fsprogs must be installed before Util-Linux because it is normally installed that way alphabetically. The alpha order does solve the dependency. The alpha order does coincidentally solve the dependency, but that may not always be true if Util-Linux, for whatever reason, needs to be moved up in the build sometime later. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Build order rationale page
Chris Staub wrote: Bruce Dubbs wrote: The lists seem a bit too prominent. I don't mind just having a single sentence for listing a couple of dependencies like this, but in a couple instances the list of deps. for a certain package is fairly long. In the case of Coreutils, there are actually several more - I just haven't listed them all yet because I don't want to do too much on this page if I'm not sure I'll be changing the whole format later... Or were you saying that the bulleted lists are OK for listing packages with a bunch of deps., but there just seem to be too many of them right now? -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Build order rationale page
El Viernes, 7 de Abril de 2006 17:38, Chris Staub escribió: I've started working on a page describing the reasoning behind the package build order for LFS. Take a look at it here - http://linuxfromscratch.org/~chris/lfs-book/chapter05/buildorder.html. Any comments - page layout, location, etc., are welcome. I don't have much actual information there yet, but it should be enough to give an idea of what it would look like. Some days ago I send to Jeremy a patch with XML templates to describe all that stuff and to add in each package file the testsuite dependencies. Maybe both you should to work on that together ;-) -- Manuel Canales Esparcia Usuario de LFS nº2886: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org LFS en castellano: http://www.escomposlinux.org/lfs-es http://www.lfs-es.com TLDP-ES: http://es.tldp.org -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Build order rationale page
Chris Staub wrote: Chris Staub wrote: Bruce Dubbs wrote: The lists seem a bit too prominent. I don't mind just having a single sentence for listing a couple of dependencies like this, but in a couple instances the list of deps. for a certain package is fairly long. In the case of Coreutils, there are actually several more - I just haven't listed them all yet because I don't want to do too much on this page if I'm not sure I'll be changing the whole format later... Or were you saying that the bulleted lists are OK for listing packages with a bunch of deps., but there just seem to be too many of them right now? IMO, the list format for dependencies creates too much vertical whitespace. If you want to list each package, then a bullet to start each package would be OK, but the dependencies should be listed horizontally. For instance, look at almost any BLFS page at the Contents section: Installed Programs: c_rehash, openssl, and openssl_fips_fingerprint Installed Libraries: libcrypto.[so,a] and libssl.[so,a] Installed Directories: /etc/ssl and /usr/include/ssl For a longer list, a little more vertical whitespace between lines and/or bullets would be ok. -- bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Build order rationale page
Archaic wrote: On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 12:48:29PM -0400, Chris Staub wrote: I disagree - all such dependencies should be listed regardless of whether they are accounted for by alphabetical order. It's starting to sound like you want to duplicate the info in the individual package pages. I don't agree with that. Oddities like circular deps and binary path hardcoding are things that the individual package pages don't support and would be very welcome here. The other info is just duplicate. If I'm missing the point, feel free to enlighten me. :) Not really. The package installation page just lists what is needed to build that package. The buildorder page lists exactly what needs to be built *in a particular order*. The point is to specify that util-linux in Chapter 6 must be built after e2fsprogs in Chapter 6 - in other words, if we were to install e2fsprogs in Chapter 5 for some reason, that would not be enough to satisfy the util-linux dependency. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Build order rationale page
Archaic, Apr 7, 13:30 -0600: However, this sort of information seems most useful to developers and the more highly advanced readers. it is sort of like an index of knowledge gained and applicable to development, but not really applicable to following the book to produce a working system. Comments? So far I've only seen 3 other people say anything in this thread. OK, so I guess I'll have to creep out of my hole again :-) This is not relevant for Joe Average LFS Builder -- doesn't belong in the book. This is highly relevant and non-trivial-to-gain knowledge -- put it somewhere else. The Wiki springs to mind, though it hasn't really seen a lot of activity lately. uli /hiding in hole again -- Uli Fahrenberg -- http://www.math.aau.dk/~uli -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Build order rationale page
Uli Fahrenberg wrote: Archaic, Apr 7, 13:30 -0600: However, this sort of information seems most useful to developers and the more highly advanced readers. it is sort of like an index of knowledge gained and applicable to development, but not really applicable to following the book to produce a working system. Comments? So far I've only seen 3 other people say anything in this thread. I'm a lurker and not a developer but I do build LFS/BLFS frequently for fun :-) This dependency information seems to me to be very valuable (and not just for the book itself...) - perhaps an appendix in the book would be a suitable place??? Al LFS ID: 216 -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Build order rationale page
Archaic wrote: On Fri, Apr 07, 2006 at 01:36:39PM -0400, Chris Staub wrote: Not really. The package installation page just lists what is needed to build that package. The buildorder page lists exactly what needs to be built *in a particular order*. The point is to specify that util-linux in Chapter 6 must be built after e2fsprogs in Chapter 6 - in other words, if we were to install e2fsprogs in Chapter 5 for some reason, that would not be enough to satisfy the util-linux dependency. I see now what you are saying and agree. However, this sort of information seems most useful to developers and the more highly advanced readers. Perhaps a note should be placed in chap5's intro linking to this advanced information with a caveat that it isn't needed for a regular joe just wanting to build a system. Then place the info at the end of the book. The way I see it, it is sort of like an index of knowledge gained and applicable to development, but not really applicable to following the book to produce a working system. This is valuable information and needs to be preserved. I agree that it seems out of place for the mainline of the book. An appendix and/or wiki seems more appropriate to me. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Re: Build order rationale page
On 4/7/06, Archaic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I see now what you are saying and agree. However, this sort of information seems most useful to developers and the more highly advanced readers. Perhaps a note should be placed in chap5's intro linking to this advanced information with a caveat that it isn't needed for a regular joe just wanting to build a system. I think it's useful for anyone. The first time I built the book, it seemed some random collection of utilities (not quite, but you get the point). If this dependency info had been available I think I would have been able to understand the connection of the tools a bit better. -- Dan -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
