on Friday, May 27, 2005 at 7:58 Archaic wrote: [...]
" setups should be handled in hints and *not* in the book. Too many layers " of abstraction will turn people off. What's the purpose of supporting " more methods if it turns off the core audience of the book? I think we " need to really consider what hoops we are willing to jump through to " gain certain benefits. Pardon me for butting in here but, to me in my ignorance, the one benefit that would justify (again, to me - I'm not trying to speak for anyone else) almost anything would be the 'purity of the build' (which I understand to mean the new build containing as close to zero as possible code resulting from anything but the new source) even in very small increments. I thought that was why the book had gone in its present direction. Was I wrong? R -- http://www.quen.net "Gold needs no endorsement, it can be tested with scales and acids. The recipient of gold does not have to trust the government stamp upon it, if he does not trust the government that stamped it. No act of faith is called for when gold is used in payments, and no compulsion is required." -Benjamin M. Anderson -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
