Am 16.5.2013 03:03, schrieb Stefan & Rebekka Wetter: > I wonder, why these patches are needed? > Are the upstream-sources not able to be compiled without?
Good questions (as they say). While trying to stay on topic, I'll take the liberty and rephrase them to Why are patches needed at all? for my post and try to answer/comment. First, I agree with the previous respondents (patches are just needed, some address the unique(?) configurations of (B)LFS, what would the world be without them, just live with them etc.) Now that so many celebrities have come out on this, I've decided to finally break my own silence on this subject that had been obsessing me for years. I'll use a particular example but it's more general (and possibly ugly, cover-up, sloppiness?, etc.) in nature. For me, it all started on a dark and stormy night, while trying to compile GTK+ 2.22.0 and failing. It culminated in Bug 631910 of 2010-10-11: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=631910 (for the curious) In case you're there, please observe (and absorb) the Comment #1 (and only) which quickly closed this "non" issue. True or incompetence or cover-up, etc.? I've obsessed on this ever since. In desperation, I created a little note for myself to use on any subsequent compilation (BLFS style) of a new GTK+ 2 version on 2011-03-08 (i.e., more than two years ago) which reads (FWIW): # After untarring the package (_before_ configure) sed -i "s/db2html gtk-faq.sgml/db2html \ gtk-faq.sgml -o gtk-faq/" docs/faq/Makefile.in ; echo $? sed -i "s/db2html gtk-tut.sgml/db2html \ gtk-tut.sgml -o gtk-tut/" docs/tutorial/Makefile.in ; echo $? Now, it so happens the BLFS instructions for GTK+-2.24.17 state (as of 2013-05-09): Install GTK+ 2 by running the following commands: sed -i 's#l \(gtk-.*\).sgml#& -o \1#' docs/{faq,tutorial}/Makefile.in ... (sounds eerily similar to my Oct. 2010 beef, don't it?) So on this particular example (but much more widespread, as I said) my obsessive question was (and still is): How do some other people compile their package, and in what configurations so that they are obviously NOT in need of an LFS/BLFS style "patch"? How? How? I'd like to thank the issuers (husband and wife?) of and commentators on this thread. You really helped me lift a heavy burden off my chest, a burden I had to keep inside for so many years. Still obsessed and puzzled (evidently), but at peace with myself now, -- Alex
-- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
