I wrote: > Greg Schafer wrote: >> You seem to be striving for perfection. When I want all the bells and >> whistles I run a mainstream distro. > > Without this, LFS is unsuitable for production use. Nevertheless, people > want it. There are only two ways to deal with this situation: make LFS > work perfectly, or drive them away from LFS even before they think about > it in production. So, we are back at the old dilemma about LFS-course > (that has to be simple and fully understandable by everyone, possibly > even oversimplified, and it is not a bug that it doesn't work for a > significant portion of users) vs LFS-distro (that also has to be > present, just to show the shortcomings of LFS-course as a distro).
Sorry for this part of the message, it's too flame-prone. Here is a better expression of the same thought: Some people do want to use LFS in production. There are only two ways to deal with this situation: make LFS work perfectly, or drive them away from LFS, e.g., by including somewhere in the preface some concrete missing features that make LFS unsuitable for production use, and give some foundations to the fact that these features are really required. -- Alexander E. Patrakov -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
