On Fri, Aug 05, 2005 at 07:59:43AM +0100, Richard A Downing wrote: > > I assume ( note ;-) that you use 'book' here to refer to the BLFS Book.
You assume correctly. ;) > My point is that BLFS-Support is NOT a 'BLFS Book' support list but a > Beyond 'LFS Book' Support list. I have NEVER seen it written that there > is a 'complete and unadulterated' LFS assumption in requesting support > from the BLFS-Support list. If there is, then we need another list. I don't recall ever seeing anyone say that support would be withheld due to the lack of an installed LFS package. However, unless otherwise stated by the person requesting support, it is only natural to assume that the LFS book was followed. http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/svn/introduction/askhelp.html explicitly states to mention deviation. But back to the original pariah comment, when dealing with a dependency, it can cause a less than friendly response when, after several attempts at finding a solution, it is finally realized (or mentioned) that a necessary portion of LFS was excluded which would have solved the person's problem before he ever had a problem. -- 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
