Bruce Dubbs wrote:
It is time to start considering a new LFS release.
I see that we are behind on gcc and glibc as gcc-4.1 and glibc-2.4 have
been released.
I don't think these are appropriate if we're thinking of a near-term
release. They're simply too new and untested at present. The current
toolchain has had a fair amount of testing already and has proved to be
relatively stable. The only change I'd like to see is an upgrade to
gcc-4.0.3 when it's available, in order to fix a kernel compilation
problem (see ticket #1718).
The kernel is about to release 2.6.16 (they have been on 2.6.16-rc5 for
about two weeks now) so we are quite a bit behind there.
Yes, but any upgrade to the kernel will require a newer version of udev
which is why the udev_update branch was created.
I'm not sure what the status of the udev branch is. I haven't seen much
activity there for a while.
I don't think it's far off at all now. There's a few known bugs in trac
and another couple of minor one's I'll be fixing up real soon now. The
biggest issue at the moment is ticket #1720.
Perhaps an update to the Roadmap on the wiki and some target dates there
would help.
Well, apart from putting "Real Soon Now" against each one, I'm not sure
how accurate we can be with dates.
The reason I'm asking is that BLFS needs to go into a different mode to
get out a companion release and there have been a lot of significant
updates including X, Gnome, and KDE since the last stable release. That
includes rebuilding all the packages with the latest toolchain once that
gets frozen in LFS.
OK then. I'll go out on a limb and say that LFS will be feature
complete by 2006-04-01, at which point we'll branch a stabilisation
effort and keep trunk for regular package updates including the gcc-4.1
and glibc-2.4 stuff. Does that sound reasonable to everyone?
Regards,
Matt.
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
