Randy McMurchy wrote: > david567 wrote these words on 08/15/07 11:45 CST: > >> Randy McMurchy wrote: >> > > >> Indeed, the book would need to be the implementation. >> > > My point exactly. You are suggesting a total implentation, where > all we really need to do is explain *how* to implement if the > reader wants. Not intrusive that way. Not doing a total > implementation does however ruin cut-and-paste for folks that > *do* want the framework. But I don't look at that as an issue, > as we are not suggesting implementation of a PM, but just a > framework for one of many, which means folks are customizing > anyway. > >
Agreed. >>> We've always worked with the underlying philosophy of "minimal". Said >>> differently, "just enough to create a working bootable system". PM >>> does not fall into that realm. >>> >>> >> Adding sustainable/upgradeable is not too far off the mark. >> > > To me, it is hundreds of miles off the mark. > > I'm not sure which of us is the devil's advocate. 'Unix and C, the ultimate virus!', long live LFS! David Jensen -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
