On 5/20/12 5:34 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote: > OK, then what's wrong with a tarball of binaries that we have created > for this purpose? There could be a tarball of the base LFS system and > then additional tarballs for certain packages or groups (e.g. xorg) of > packages.
This method does not collect and keep package dependency. Using a manager like pacman, ff you have a repository with dependency baked in, when you go to build an individual tool you can automatically discover and download/install into your build environment all required packages - and only the required packages. Also, for a reader who is serious about making a distro, creating a giant tarball of the LFS base does not teach any good practices for creating and deploying a distribution of their own. Another benefit of a package manager is that changelog information can be related to individual packages and can be easier to track changes - again, this is less important in LFS, but could be useful in BLFS. If it's simplicity that you like, one advantage of pacman is that the packages themselves are actually just tar archives containing the files and metadata. JH -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
