Fernando de Oliveira wrote: > Em 02-03-2014 21:42, Ken Moffat escreveu: >> On Sun, Mar 02, 2014 at 05:16:44PM -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote: >>> We just released LFS-7.5 and we need to look at releasing BLFS-7.5 in >>> the next few days. AFAIK, all the 7.5 tickets are complete and all the >>> packages tagged for 7.5. It is just a matter of doing the release, but >>> I'm sure that there are some tweaks that are necessary. >>> >>> For planning purposes, I think we can target Wednesday. March 5. >>> >>> Comments? >>> >> The --libexecdir switches still look a bit iffy to me. >> >> 1. The following use --libexecdir with what I think are adequate >> explanations of why: vte2, acl, dhcpcd. Anyone who disagrees : >> please speak up! >> >> 2. The following explain an optional --libexecdir switch: gnupg2, >> emacs, librep, geoclue. I don't have a problem with leaving this >> sort of thing in for a transitional period while people may still be >> using older versions of LFS (does 3 years sound about right?), BUT >> >> (i.) the markup is '<parameter>', I think it hould be '<option>' ? >> >> (ii.) should we also do this for all other existing BLFS packages >> which now use /usr/libexec ? >> >> 3. Subversion used to run a subshell to interrogate apxs. The >> current page looks unusual, but I haven't any desire to build it for >> 7.5 (I only rebuilt my server in September), so I have to assume it >> is ok ? > > More or less. I am comparing the two versions in BLFS svn and 7.4 (It is > very good to having releases, so to easily comparing instructions > versions. In "Command Explanations", of svn (7.5-rc1) I think we should > write the complete switch, or it is almost useless: > > s|=...|=$(/usr/bin/apxs -q libexecdir)| > > In configure, I don't know how to handle the switch alone > "--with-apache-libexecdir" > >> >> 4. The following are still doing things the old way: >> menu-cache, qemu, openbox, mc, pulseaudio. Is there any reason why >> these should NOT drop --libexecdir ? > > menu-cache and openbox are my faults. I can fix them.
And I'll fix qemu. That one is my omission. -- Bruce > The difference between my opinions and nothing are as small as the > majority here wants. But I did not pay attention to this libexec drop > subject at the beginning and it bothered a lot, during tags. So, I would > like to propose that these kind of things should never be left for the > tfreeze/tag stage, but be done before or after, in the future. Just > tagging is hard enough a work. > > -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
