On 10/27/2009 12:16 AM, Bryan Kadzban wrote: > Noting which programs are needed wouldn't be too bad. Moving a lot of > them into LFS, I wouldn't like. Most of the stuff you mentioned is > pretty rarely needed in reality -- or at least, on my system, which is > mostly all I care about. Obviously this is a bit of a skewed > perspective though. :-P
I agree...abut having them noted, not moving them, and making an effort to support it. I'd also like to see the boot scripts dynamically allocated (dependency based), as it is one less list to worry about, and should a BLFS package install it's own scripts, we no longer have to worry about maintaining our own for it (cups for example). -- DJ Lucas -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content, and is believed to be clean. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
