Dan Nicholson wrote:

* Update test logs and failure info for toolchain: glibc, gcc, binutils
I can provide logs for PIII as Archaic asked a couple weeks ago.  I'll
probably bootstrap a system using jhalfs for testing in the next week
or so.

Thanks, I think this is ticket #1659 or at least very closely related to it.

* Decide whether the l-l-h inotify patch is in or out.  It is here:
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~dnicholson/downloads/linux-libc-headers-2.6.12.0-inotify-1.patch

I don't see any reason not to have it in. It's partially covered by ticket #1782.

I've tested this on my system based on LFS-SVN, but I see no reasons
why it wouldn't work for 6.2.

Seeing as 6.2 will be branched from LFS-SVN then no, I can't see any reasons it wouldn't work either :-)

Needs a proper header and such before
committing to patches, though.

OK, I'll deal with that tomorrow unless someone beats me to it.

* Linux-2.6.17 or stick with 2.6.16 series?

2.6.16 definitely. 2.6.16.21 came out today, and I'd expect 2.6.16.22 out over this coming weekend or shortly afterwards. It's not crucial that we have the absolute latest micro release but it'd be embarrasing having to put out an errata within days of 6.2's release.

* Package updates within same series (udev, e2fsprogs, shadow, bison?)

Those that I think are feasible/desired for 6.2 are marked as such in trac (they're tickets #1804, #1806, #1815 and #1807 respectively for the packages you mention. ). If anyone disagrees with the target milestone on any of them feel free to make alternative suggestions.

* The other 6.2 milestone bugs in Trac.

Yep, I think #1765 (update LFS license) can be retargetted as it's not a show-stopper and needs to be done properly so will take time. The current license has served us well enough so far, I think.

Thanks for your input, Dan. It looks like we're pretty much up to date in trac, which makes progress much easier to monitor.

Regards,

Matt.

--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Reply via email to