On Feb 22, 2010, at 6:42 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote: > No problem. I think the idea of a hint is appropriate, but we haven't > heard from you for a long time. I didn't know if you were up to speed on > the decision we made.
Yeah, thanks. I needed a serious break. It was good that I did, too. I have been able to get a lot of my priorities arranged correctly and things are generally doing well. Off and on I've been doing some work on a personal project: essentially a distro based loosely on LFS/DIY/CLFS using rpm as a package manager (although, there's been nothing distributed yet). I say loosely because it's really just the initial build environment that is bootstrapped, and my scripts for doing that don't quite match any of the above. The focus is to provide a solid, minimal system for use as an application server. There's no deadlines with it, so I take my time. I was surprised at how useful rpm actually is at solidifying the final build, and at forcing you to think about where all the files are going. Anyway, that's how I came across this particular issue. > I did read 'Changes for LFS' as a suggestion to > change the book. You probably didn't intend that. Yeah, sorry. Intended only as a reference for what was needed to reproduce the error. -- JH -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
