Robert Daniels wrote: > I'm really not too sure what to do about the scripting myself. In some > ways it makes sense to put it with package management, as they both > relate to automation. As you note, it would also make sense before the > bootstrap, to teach how to automate that module. A third option is to > refer to outside sources for scripting tutorials. LFS currently > assumes a basic level of Linux competency, and I wouldn't want to > totally get rid of this requirement. Scripting information is > available in abundance through the internet and bash documentation.
One can't implement RPM-based package management without also scripting the build. So maybe the following compromise is suitable: refer to outside sources for scripting Chapter 5, provide a fully scripted (via spec files) implementation of Chapter 6 and BLFS in the "Package management with RPM" module. > So, all of a sudden, we have multiple target audiences, at very > different levels of experience. It will be a problem trying to come up > with a solution that will satisfy all of them, but I think it can be > done. Then it may be a good idea to have multiple books, or, as other suggest, multiple modules. OTOH, Linux was conceptually simpler and "just worked" earlier (i.e., in years 2003--2004) without the need to disagree much with upstream (I mean UTF-8 patches and, until recently, udev). That's why a book for Linux veterans was also understandable by mere mortals. -- Alexander E. Patrakov -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
