On Thu, 16 Oct 2008, TheOldFellow wrote: > However, I do not believe that there is much value in it as a > bootstrap, when, as Alexander says, there is knoppix (and a plethora of > other LiveCD distros) and maintenance resources are scarce. Well, I really do believe there is value in a (minimal, somehow up-to-date) LFS LiveCD. For me its an ideal starting point to bring LFS to a machine. There is usually no other usable host system on it (no Linux at all, a hopelessly outdated one or a non-functional one). Yes, another LiveCD would usually work as well, but has some disadvantages:
I have to care whether it meets all requirements whereas building some current LFS from some current LFS LiveCD would just be expected to cause less trouble. And even more important: Its a working example. If something goes wrong, e.g. because of deviating from a book or because of testing a newer version of some package, there is a reference. One could copy config files, use binaries, compare the existence if files and so on easier than with other distros. So for me, a pretty minimal LFS LiveCD (English only, console only, just a few basic tools like lynx (or mc for nostalgic reasons)) would be quite handy. Sounds like pretty little effort to keep that up-to-date, but would surely save me time and headache. Uwe -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
