Community discussion: including any devel-tools in LFS Chap. 6

2005-12-21 Thread Feldmeier Bernd
Hi all, as asked before, why dont we devide chapter 6 packages into -- essential / devel (optional) packages?? The devel packages could be a sub chapter of LFS chap 6 and marked as optional install. packages e.g. gcc, perl ... Doing so we can use the temp self hosted chroot chap 5

Re: Community discussion: including any devel-tools in LFS Chap. 6

2005-12-21 Thread Archaic
On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 03:33:24PM +0100, Feldmeier Bernd wrote: This could really lead to a clean target rootfs approach without the need of any devel tools ... Which would be completely against the stated goal of LFS. -- Archaic Want control, education, and security from your operating

AW: Community discussion: including any devel-tools in LFS Chap. 6

2005-12-21 Thread Feldmeier Bernd
as an option like in Gregs great stuff. regards Bernd -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Auftrag von Archaic Gesendet: Mittwoch, 21. Dezember 2005 16:34 An: LFS Developers Mailinglist Betreff: Re: Community discussion: including any devel-tools in LFS Chap. 6

AW: AW: Community discussion: including any devel-tools in LFS Chap. 6

2005-12-21 Thread Feldmeier Bernd
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 21. Dezember 2005 16:49 An: LFS Developers Mailinglist Betreff: Re: AW: Community discussion: including any devel-tools in LFS Chap. 6 Feldmeier Bernd wrote: Hi, Well, Archaic as subjected before we could discuss that. I think it is absolutely not against the goal of LFS

Re: AW: Community discussion: including any devel-tools in LFS Chap. 6

2005-12-21 Thread Randy McMurchy
Feldmeier Bernd wrote these words on 12/21/05 09:44 CST: absolutely not against the goal of LFS, because pointing out how a sane working system can be created has nothing to do with any dev-tools installed. A sane working system. Is this what you call a bare-bones just-finished LFS build

Re: AW: Community discussion: including any devel-tools in LFS Chap. 6

2005-12-21 Thread Jeff Cousino
LFS is source code based distro. So compilers are required. You can't compare it to binary distros. I would suggest you take what you like from LFS and Gregs DIY. Develop a build environment and create what ever kind of binary image you want. But you really shouldn't demand others to do all the

Re: Community discussion: including any devel-tools in LFS Chap. 6

2005-12-21 Thread Richard A Downing
On Wed, 21 Dec 2005 17:06:53 +0100 Feldmeier Bernd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you call this that way ok. But marking some packs as optional that is really educational in my mind. The user can decide wether to include that not essential stuff like devel-packs ... Bernd, We've all

Re: Community discussion: including any devel-tools in LFS Chap. 6

2005-12-21 Thread Matthew Burgess
Richard A Downing wrote: Bernd, We've all tried to be friendly, but you are abusing our patience. WILL YOU FOR GOTTS SAKE STOP TOP POSTING and learn how to trim your quotes. In addition, Bernd, please find an email client that does whatever is necessary to allow sane clients to thread