Thanks Bruce, >>> From a previous discussion here, I got the impression the people >>> use their own scripts to automate lfs. > > That's part of the learning process.
A fair point, but it sets a pretty high standard for even building a second time, and likely loses many potential developers who built once and left. >> Gah, it probably takes a long time to find all the updates... It'd be >> nice if we had software that could find updates and alert blfs-dev. > > Even such a script appeared, we would need a lot more volunteers to make > changes thatn we have now. It would be enough for me to know that the build instructions in BLFS are up to date. That is just that the build instructions work on new LFS, even if the BLFS package is old. > Many times the suggestion is that *we* change the book. No patches are > submitted. No hints submitted. Most major suggestions require a lot of > work by someone other than the suggester. Many suggestions make LFS Fair enough. Though, as the suggester is often someone trying to "get involved", I believe it would be better to try explaining why something is more difficult than it seems at first to the non-expert, and preferably point the suggester in the right direction to help him get started on his own. The common response that the developers have too much work, and are not interested in the improvement does not help motivate potential new developers. > more complicated. It's already complicated. Adding complexity like > multi-lib or package management detracts from the purpose of building a > working system, especaially for first time builders. Another fair point. However, the lack of package management and automation deters users from trying a second time, or even retrying if they find out late in the process they made a mistake and need to restart. I would like these as a way of controlling my own built from scratch systems. Not as a way do download a generic LFS distribution. >>> its direction. > > We have. We keep the book up to date but only add packages if needed A reasonable choice, but one which given the stable state of LFS does not invite new developers into the team. --yaacov -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
