Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
> On Sep 2, 2011, at 1:27 AM, DJ Lucas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I believe complexity was the main objection.
>
> Seriously? What complexity? I'm sorry but LFS is a complex book for
> advanced Linux users. We're really going to run away from a set of
> shell scripts because we can't be bothered to read them? (they're
> actually very straightforward if you just go through them)
>
> But time and effort will be spent solving problems in the existing
> scripts that have already been discussed and resolved in the LSBs.
>
> Sorry, but objection of complexity is both ridiculous and hysterical.
Complexity was not the reason I rewrote the scripts. I didn't want to
add initd-tools to LFS, although I did add it to BLFS. I made the
scripts LSB compatible, but didn't use the initd-tools to install them.
I also didn't like the network layout. I moved ifup/ifdown to /sbin and
created /lib/boot for bootscript use (e.g. network service scripts). I
got rid of /etc/sysconfig/rc because I thought it gave a level of
indirection for no perceived benefit. I changed the network
configuration files to something I thought was more sane that didn't
depend on directory structure/directory names.
I also added /run as a top level directory, mounted a tmpfs there, and
use it for /var/{run,lock,shm} and a place for bootscript messages
(/var/run/bootlog) available after the 3rd line of the 1st script.
I started all this in early July. The initial commit was #9574 on Aug
1. There really have been very few comments, positive or negative,
until now (after -rc1 has been released), but I guess that's one purpose
of an rc release.
-- Bruce
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
