Randy McMurchy wrote: > Jim Gifford wrote these words on 05/23/05 16:15 CST: > > >>I would like to suggest we move flex into the BLFS book after the 6.0 >>release, and remove flex from the Cross-LFS/Multi-arch book. >> >>Please list your comments as a go or no go. > > > I am against this idea. Flex is a tool used in the build process > for many, many packages. If we remove Flex, then the autotools > and other unused (for LFS purposes) packages should be removed as > well.
I too am against the idea. LFS is supposed to build a base system suitable for building other packages. It is not designed to be a minimal system. If it were, there are several packages that would be removed, including perl. >From the BLFS perspective, we assume all the LFS packages are available. I really don't want to add this package to BLFS and track the dependencies--especially a package that has been in LFS since the beginning. There are more developers for LFS than for BLFS, but the package count is about 6 to 1 in favor of BLFS. How much effort is there in maintaining this one package in LFS? -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
