Selon Petr Ovtchenkov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: ... > > 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. >
LFS has already diverged to LFS, CLFS, HLFS and DIY. The numerous targets has weaken each part. In the same time, LFS is also used in IPCop, Smoothwall and some other derivatives. There is probably far more systems build from IPCop, Smoothwall and the derivatives than pure LFS. On IPCop, we will move to a packaging system because without package management, experience has show that's too painfull to maintain. I am not in a position to ask something from LFS as I really do not have actually the time to contribute back to LFS. If you need some new forces, you could find many on the LFS derivatives users. We have 14000 download for IPCop-1.4.16 sources delivered in july, 1800 download for IPCop-1.4.18 sources delivered in december. But you need attractives goals, that's may be hard when something simply work, even it is not optimal. Gilles -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
