Alexander E. Patrakov a écrit : > Please reply to this message (please, limit this to the lfs-dev list > only) and mark with "X" the items that apply. If the answer is not the > same on your different Linux systems, write numbers of systems to > which each answer applies instead of a simple "X" mark. The resuts may > or may not be used for determining the future course of LFS. They will > certainly be used to verify or disprove my guess about the way the LFS > community is now split. > > [ ] I am an editor of LFS or one of the related projects > [ ] I use LFS as my primary Linux system > [X] I use LFS on more than one PC (including virtual machines) > [ ] I deviate a lot from LFS (not counting package updates as deviations) > [X] I deviate a lot from BLFS (not counting package updates as deviations) > > I use the following package management technique: > (X) It's all in my head! > ( ) I trust the lists of files in the book > ( ) I rebuild everything every three months or less, so there is no > need to manage anything! > ( ) Installation script tracing with installwatch or checkinstall > ( ) Installation script tracing with some other tool > ( ) Timestamp-based "find" operation > ( ) User-based > ( ) RPM > ( ) DPKG > ( ) Simple binary tarballs produced with DESTDIR > ( ) Other DESTDIR-based method of producing binary packages > (X) Other
> I use the following features provided by a package manager: > [ ] Knowing where each file comes from > [ ] Clean uninstallation of a package > [ ] Removal of obsolete files when upgrading to a new version > [ ] Ability to upgrade toolchain components (most notably, glibc) painlessly > [ ] Ability to revert mistakes easily and quickly by installing an old > binary package > [ ] Ability to compile once, deploy on many macines > [ ] Scripting the build > > I will ignore the future LFS advice on package management if it > [ ] Can't be applied on a busy machine where many files are > accessed/modified everyy minute > [X] Can't be used to transfer packages to another machine > [ ] Interferes with config.site files described in DIY-linux > [X] Will clobber configuration files wen upgrading package versions > [X] Doesn't explain how to package software beyond BLFS > [ ] Requires learning another language/syntax besides bash shell syntax > [ ] Exists at all > > Hello my little contribution : More than an hundred LFS in production today, i will surely have some use of PM but I haven't find anything really satisfying. I think that LFS will gain of some articles about the inner work of distribute, deploying and managing a live system, that can complete very well the building of the system. In fact the hardest problem I meet daily, is not on what packages my package depends on, but what packages depend on my package. For the moment, I haven't find a PM that pleinly satisfied me on that aspect (but I can have missed something). On the automation side, I have loved nAlfs (which I continue to use). I hope that (if there's some automation) It will be as easy and as clear as nAlfs. I have today more than 1500 nAlfs scripts and not really enthousiast to rewrite them all ;) but I will do if there a real advantage (for example : conditionnal execution) JC Passard -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
