On Wednesday 27 February 2008 10:35, TheOldFellow wrote: > On Wed, 27 Feb 2008 09:57:56 +0300 > Petr Ovtchenkov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Tuesday 26 February 2008 21:37, TheOldFellow wrote: > > > <skip> > > > ... > > > > > > For instance, if the answer to that included a package manager (for > > > which I would vote), then many of the difficulties of maintaining the > > > LiveCD go away. > > > > Well, do you have answer for: assuming package management, what > > the key difference between LFS [in future] and Gentoo? This question > > is interesting because of target audience and goals. > > Gentoo is run by them them, LFS is run by US. > > This is called Competition, and is, in general, a Good Thing. The > reason is that it encourages innovation, and innovation means > progress. > > The alternative, called a Planned Economy, leads to bureaucrats and > other parasites who tell you what is best for you while stealing your > lunch. > > R.
Richard, I don't mean holy war, I mean LFS targets. Adding package management into LFS lead to so-so decisions and so-so problems. This decisions and associated problems (well, and benefits too) everybody can see on example of Gentoo as closest example, and made estimations: is it really what you want? [i.e., in business words, 'compare with competitors and understand you difference from competitors---you unique offering']. IMO, shifting to some 'package management' also shift LFS to econiche already thick with 'normal' distibutions. But in this econiche it may lost 'educational' and 'basic kit' features. I'm fears that addition of package management will kill LFS. -- - ptr -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
