Hi everyone, On 4/30/06, Matt Darcy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
1.) Kernel Headers, yes you knew this was coming but its certainly worth talking about, a lots been said on this but its really still unclear of direction. I suppose the discussion should center around a.) Do we stick with LLH and pray it takes off again
It's dead. But I agree with Archaic that for LFS-6.2, a stable release, this tried and true set should be used.
b.) work with Jim's methods of sanitizing our own headers
I would be willing to go this route. I also would like to consider Jürg Billeter's sanitizing script.
c.) Look at what other distros are doing and try to work with them d.) A N other option 2.) Udev - This again has been a hot topic of many projects, but with LFS now dropping hotplug I feel it important ti discuss and clear up a few areas a.) Udev rules - how complete/incomplete should they be b.) which project cover which rules eg; lfs base only, blfs additional, clfs base+additional archs devices ? that sort of thing c.) what are the livecd doing with udev - removing hotplug ? what rules are they using ? etc d.) Should we all use the same rules lfs/livecd/cross-lfs/hlfs even ? e.) other topics aound udev 3.) users and group creation, I'm reluctant to touch on this again as I know its close to a few individuals hearts and a lot of time has been put into this, but due to the ude discussion I think its worth at least touching upon. a.) do we define uuid/gid for users in LFS - I don't think this is an option and has to be done b.) how does blfs address this, does it specify uid/gid per user, does it speficy users and let the user map the uid/gid - does it do nothing and just you need an "X" user with X permissions c.) how do the uid's/gid's tie in with udev rules ? for all projects d.) do all projects use a unifrorm set of uid/gids and if so -how to we acomplish this? e.) other uid/gid points On a final note, I know this has been said to individuals before, and I preach a lot about it, but I'm hoping that with this discussion there is a real potential to bring all the projects closer together and more "agreed" on the direction the overall project is taking, even if projects go their own ways on things, at least it will be understood that X is doing it different because of X + Y and perhaps we can start sharing across-project information better and work as a bigger group better. Apologies if this mail seems to spell out the obvious, but I'd really like to say it public and try to get a consensus where everyone working say "yes, I understand this is what we are all doing - even if I don't agree" thanks, Matt -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
-- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
