On Tue, Dec 14, 2004 at 08:34:17AM -0500, Ian Murdock wrote: > On Fri, 2004-12-10 at 00:44 +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > Besides that the LCC sounds like an extraordinarily bad idea, passing > > around binaries only makes sense if you can't easily reproduce them from > > the source (which I defined very broadly to include all build scripts > > and depencies), and that case is the worst possible thing a distribution > > can get into. > > The LCC core will be fully reproducible from source. You may > (and probably will) lose any certifications if you do that, > for the same reason that the distros reproduced from the Red > Hat Enterprise Linux source (e.g., White Box Linux) lose them. > But it won't be take it or leave it. If reproducing from > source and/or modifying the core packages is more important to > you than the certifications, you will be able to do that.
So again what do you gain by distributing binaries if their reproducible from source?
