On 11/25/05, Jeremy Huntwork <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Now, if there is another way of achieving what Matthias has done - one > where we don't have to have a separate user for each package - that > would be great. In short, what I'd like to see is a clearer > understanding of the packages being installed - the ability to audit the > installation of packages and determine a proper course of action for each. > > Gerard understood what I was after and what I am looking to incorporate: > > http://archives.linuxfromscratch.org/mail-archives/lfs-dev/2005-November/054332.html
After reading what you wrote, it still sounds like package management to me, but that's doesn't really matter. I'm still struggling a little bit to see what your suggestion is. It sounds like this: 1. Keep track of all the files installed by each package 2. Make sure files from one package do not overwrite files from another unless they have your consent. 3. Keep executable files from being setuid root. If this is your suggestion, then I think it's better off as a hint or something like that. This surely would add complexity to the build instructions, as package management does. However, I don't think the default instructions should do this. Probably after you built LFS once, you realized that it was important to use package management (I did). At that point, you can choose from the myriad of package management systems including package-users, install-log, etc. But a beginning LFSer might lack the experience to pull this off. Also, the default instructions should not force any particular package management or "control" system. That's my opinion, anyway. -- Dan -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
