It's active, but I seem to be the only maintainer and I work 55 hours per week. There are several things I'd like to complete before a stable release... stuff like fixing most of the compiler warnings, finding how to get all the testsuites to pass, auditing the patches. The combination of gcc4 and fortify_source added some bugs that also need to be worked out. Plus I've been sidetracked with tempfile handling, and sidetracked again with Gzip's lack of maintenance (by gnu). It came to my attention that netbsd's gzip uses zlib (and also uses libbz2 for bzip2 decompression support), and I'd like to have that (I've had good luck porting bsd features to linux and hopefully it won't stop). There's also a conflict between Owl's texinfo and texinfo-cvs. Not to mention the lfs utf8 differences.
I'm sorry to say I'm much better being an hlfs-unstable maintainer than hlfs-stable maintainer. I'd love to have hlfs-stable, but I never stop finding things to break/fix :-) If releasing hlfs-stable is a priority then it would be a good idea to create a second branch which removes the half-working stuff and stabilizes the rest. I honestly don't see an end to the instability without a second maintainer :-\ For an hlfs-stable, at the present time, I would suggest something like linux-2.4, glibc-2.4, gcc-3.4, and binutils-2.17... or even gcc41 without fortify_source. I would also suggest downgrading some packages, like shadow-utils, and adding bugfix patches. I'd be happy to help with -stable, but I don't want to stop -unstable. robert On Wednesday 13 September 2006 18:45, Jan Dvořák wrote: > Hi, > > what is the current HLFS status? Is project temporary stopped or is it > completely dead? It obviously is not in active development. > What are we waiting for? How can I, HLFS (Glibc) user help you to bring > HLFS further? > > - Mordae
pgpUlnyNFvccn.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/hlfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
