----- Mail original ----- > De: "Matt Burgess" <matt...@linuxfromscratch.org> > À: "LFS Developers Mailinglist" <lfs-dev@linuxfromscratch.org> > Envoyé: Mercredi 6 Juin 2012 08:58:30 > Objet: Re: [lfs-dev] popt in the book? > > On Wed, 2012-06-06 at 08:07 +0200, g....@free.fr wrote: > > > Except I say there is more perl scripts as I reported only the one > > with a .pl name. > > automake scripts as reported by Bryan Kadzban need perl, autoreconf > > is a perl script. > > That's fine. Nothing (well, nearly nothing) in LFS requires autoconf or > automake to build, so we could actually get rid of all 3 :-) > > I know kbd has recently required autoconf, but it looks like it may be > possible to work around that. > > Regards, > > Matt. > Your book, your rules
I don't care of some packages move from LFS to BLFS. My build system don't have an artificial frontier between what represent LFS chap6 and BLFS on. Both LFS chap 6 and later packages are always build in one shot. I didn't follow every LFS changes. That's my choice. I didn't remove pkg-config from my build system, because related to my requirements, I considered the prerequisites acceptable as I need anyway to build glib/Python. Probably since IPCop use the LFS way to build, we always build popt because another package require that. Stop to dream and code what you want to be a new reality and push that upstream. My two cent is that to be able to push upstream your changes that would allow you to deliver LFS from perl, you will need autoconf and automake to bootstrap the modified code. So you will need perl autoconf automake and cvs/svn/git working somewhere ;-) Gilles -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
