Tushar Teredesai wrote:
On 1/20/06, Jim Gifford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
This discussion needs to happen on both lfs-dev and cross-lfs, everyone
in lfs-dev seems to want it, but people in cross-lfs don't need it.
That's why I started the thread on both lists.
Why the division? I thought cross-lfs was just a way of building LFS
from arch X to arch Y but in all other respects it would be similar to
LFS. The end result of the two books should not be different (unless
it is absolutely warranted e.g. bootloaders). If I am build LFS and
cross LFS with target architecture of x86, the installation should be
identical.
That's the question. Why is there a division between the two different
communities, we got LFS that really wants it bad, and Cross-LFS where
they don't see a need for it. That's what I've been trying to figure out.
My feelings are I'm willing to try utf-8, but I don't think it's
completely ready yet. I have an issue with Man-db and adding Berkeley
DB(I just hate the constant ABI changes). I also see a problem with the
new groff depending on netpbm (Alex did find a way around that.)
I think more testing is needed before it goes into the book. We need to
know all the in's and out's. Alex did do some testing, but none of the
lfs-dev's have tested it. I'm currently testing it in cross-lfs with
Alex's changes without man-db and berkeley, and it looks promising, but
not ready for the book.
Talking with the man maintainer he's going to push up the utf-8 stuff
into the next release which will be out in a few weeks.
--
------
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
LFS User # 2577
Registered Linux User # 299986
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
