Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
> Greg Schafer wrote:
>> Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
>>> does it
>>> allow running arbitrary scripts on the DESTDIR contents before
>>> actually creating a package?
>> Um, I don't think so. However, while Pacman itself is written in C, the
>> "makepkg" portion of the s
Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
> Some people do want to use LFS in production. There are only two ways to deal
> with this situation: make LFS work perfectly, or drive them away from LFS,
> e.g.,
> by including somewhere in the preface some concrete missing features that
> make
> LFS unsuitable
Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
> Some people do want to use LFS in production. There are only two ways to deal
> with this situation: make LFS work perfectly, or drive them away from LFS,
> e.g.,
> by including somewhere in the preface some concrete missing features that
> make
> LFS unsuitable
I wrote:
> Greg Schafer wrote:
>> You seem to be striving for perfection. When I want all the bells and
>> whistles I run a mainstream distro.
>
> Without this, LFS is unsuitable for production use. Nevertheless, people
> want it. There are only two ways to deal with this situation: make LFS
> w
Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
> Greg Schafer wrote:
>> You seem to be striving for perfection. When I want all the bells and
>> whistles I run a mainstream distro.
>
> Without this, LFS is unsuitable for production use.
Expletive! I use LFS all the time for production use without PM. Alex,
lab
Greg Schafer wrote:
> Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
>> does it
>> allow running arbitrary scripts on the DESTDIR contents before
>> actually creating a package?
>
> Um, I don't think so. However, while Pacman itself is written in C, the
> "makepkg" portion of the system is a Bash script which allow
Dan Nicholson wrote these words on 03/05/08 11:22 CST:
> What package management requirements the book uses aren't really that
> important to me, which is why I didn't answer. I'd much rather just
> follow what the community wants.
What Dan said. (as an explanation why I didn't answer as well)
I'
On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 4:35 PM, Greg Schafer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> You seem to be striving for perfection. When I want all the bells and
> whistles I run a mainstream distro. It is simply too labour intensive to
> have "the lot" on a self built system. I looked at the amount of effort
>
Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
> 2008/3/4, Greg Schafer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> [x] file conflict detection <-- essential feature
>> [x] simple BLFS style dependencies <-- essential feature
>> [x] pre/post install scripts <-- essential feature
>> [x] ability to build the whole distro as non-r
On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 9:16 PM, Alexander E. Patrakov
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Still, please provide them. With only 8 editors who answered the poll,
> the correlation coefficients involving the "I am an editor" checkbox
> have an expected relative error of 35%, and you can bring this down
Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
> Please reply to this message (please, limit this to the lfs-dev list
> only) and mark with "X" the items that apply. If the answer is not the
> same on your different Linux systems, write numbers of systems to
> which each answer applies instead of a simple "X" mark.
2008/3/5, Gerard Beekmans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Do you have a running tally on this thread so-far, Alexander? I know,
> some 30 replies hardly counts as a cross-section of the LFS community,
> but at least it's a start by people who care to speak up so far.
There is no intention to provide a ta
On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 4:55 AM, Alexander E. Patrakov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Please reply to this message (please, limit this to the lfs-dev list
> only) and mark with "X" the items that apply. If the answer is not the
> same on your different Linux systems, write numbers of systems to
> whi
Do you have a running tally on this thread so-far, Alexander? I know,
some 30 replies hardly counts as a cross-section of the LFS community,
but at least it's a start by people who care to speak up so far.
I considered providing my own results but it seems I put an X in just
about every categor
First of all, I have to say the comments below are MHO. So if you're
disagree with them just ignore them.
On Monday 03 March 2008 12:55, Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
> [ ] I am an editor of LFS or one of the related projects
> [X] I use LFS as my primary Linux system
> [X] I use LFS on more than o
Alexander E. Patrakov schrieb:
> Please reply to this message (please, limit this to the lfs-dev list
> only) and mark with "X" the items that apply. If the answer is not the
> same on your different Linux systems, write numbers of systems to
> which each answer applies instead of a simple "X" mark
TheOldFellow wrote:
> On Tue, 04 Mar 2008 08:30:50 +1100
> Greg Schafer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Having said that, I believe
>> PM should be a personal thing, which is why I would never advise anyone
>> "you must XYZ as your PM". ie: I would never select a default PM for LFS.
>
> On the other
> On Mon, 03 Mar2008 "Alexander E. Patrakov" wrote:
>
> Please reply to this message (please, limit this to the
> lfs-dev list only) and mark with "X" the items that apply.
> If the answer is not the same on your different Linux
> systems, write numbers of systems to which each
On Tue, 04 Mar 2008 08:30:50 +1100
Greg Schafer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Having said that, I believe
> PM should be a personal thing, which is why I would never advise anyone
> "you must XYZ as your PM". ie: I would never select a default PM for LFS.
On the other hand, being of the educative-ob
2008/3/4, Greg Schafer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> [x] file conflict detection <-- essential feature
> [x] simple BLFS style dependencies <-- essential feature
> [x] pre/post install scripts <-- essential feature
> [x] ability to build the whole distro as non-root <-- killer feature
> [x] "meta
Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
> Please reply to this message (please, limit this to the lfs-dev list
> only) and mark with "X" the items that apply. If the answer is not the
> same on your different Linux systems, write numbers of systems to
> which each answer applies instead of a simple "X" mark.
On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 2:56 PM, Greg Schafer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sukucorp Sukucorp wrote:
>
> Arghh! Please stop mis-using the term "fakeroot". The real Fakeroot is a
> Debian package designed to simulate a superuser environment. What you are
> referring to is what the rest of the world
On Monday 03 March 2008 04:55, Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
Alexander,
I've added three new options that are important to me and to IPCop.
Thanks,
IvanK.
[ ] I am an editor of LFS or one of the related projects
[X] I use LFS as my primary Linux system
[X] I use LFS on more than one PC (incl
Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
> I use the following features provided by a package manager:
> [x] Knowing where each file comes from
> [x] Clean uninstallation of a package
> [x] Removal of obsolete files when upgrading to a new version
> [ ] Ability to upgrade toolchain components (most notably, g
On Monday 03 March 2008 12:55, Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
> Please reply to this message (please, limit this to the lfs-dev list
> only) and mark with "X" the items that apply. If the answer is not the
> same on your different Linux systems, write numbers of systems to
> which each answer applies
Sukucorp Sukucorp wrote:
> I use a homegrown pkg manager. It used to be
> based on the pkg-user + fakeroot approach, but the latest one I am
> using has the pkg-user stuff removed since I found it was adding a lot
> of complexity without much benefit. My current PM uses a fakeroot
> approach by bu
Here are my responses. I use a homegrown pkg manager. It used to be
based on the pkg-user + fakeroot approach, but the latest one I am
using has the pkg-user stuff removed since I found it was adding a lot
of complexity without much benefit. My current PM uses a fakeroot
approach by building and fa
Le Mon, 3 Mar 2008 14:55:35 +0500 "Alexander E. Patrakov"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit :
> Please reply to this message (please, limit this to the lfs-dev list
> only) and mark with "X" the items that apply. If the answer is not the
> same on your different Linux systems, write numbers of systems t
Here are my answers for my current (and planned future) use of LFS:
On 03/03/2008, Alexander E. Patrakov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [ ] I am an editor of LFS or one of the related projects
> [X] I use LFS as my primary Linux system
> [X] I use LFS on more than one PC (including virtual machin
On Mon, Mar 03, 2008 at 02:55:35PM +0500, Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
> Please reply to this message (please, limit this to the lfs-dev list
> only) and mark with "X" the items that apply. If the answer is not the
> same on your different Linux systems, write numbers of systems to
> which each ans
Hi.
My first post to this list. Although I've been subscribed for a long time,
just to follow the development, I don't have the skills needed to contribute.
Like me, I guess that there are many people, so I think this should be asked
in lfs-user too.
Well, my answers:
> [ ] I am an editor of
taipan wrote:
> ...But after reading the RPM spec-files you contributed (about which i
> was previously unaware) as well as some ArchLinux pkgbuild-files,
> couldn't the same characterization be applied to those PM's also (along
> with several others, i imagine)?
They would classify as "DESTDIR
Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
> taipan wrote:
>>> (X) Other # Portage, just because it's the native system
>
> Isn't this "Installation script tracing with some other tool" + a unique
> build
> system?
>
"Installation script tracing", yes; "a unique build system", i'm
unqualified to comment, i
[ ] I am an editor of LFS or one of the related projects
[ ] I use LFS as my primary Linux system
[X] I use LFS on more than one PC (including virtual machines)
[ ] I deviate a lot from LFS (not counting package updates as deviations)
[X] I deviate a lot from BLFS (not counting package updates
taipan wrote:
>> (X) Other # Portage, just because it's the native system
Isn't this "Installation script tracing with some other tool" + a unique build
system?
--
Alexander E. Patrakov
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscrib
[X] I am an editor of LFS or one of the related projects
[ ] I use LFS as my primary Linux system
[ ] I use LFS on more than one PC (including virtual machines)
[ ] I deviate a lot from LFS (not counting package updates as deviations)
[ ] I deviate a lot from BLFS (not counting package updates as d
Alexander E. Patrakov a écrit :
> Please reply to this message (please, limit this to the lfs-dev list
> only) and mark with "X" the items that apply. If the answer is not the
> same on your different Linux systems, write numbers of systems to
> which each answer applies instead of a simple "X" mar
-- Original message --
From: "Alexander E. Patrakov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Please reply to this message (please, limit this to the lfs-dev list
> only) and mark with "X" the items that apply. If the answer is not the
> same on your different Linux systems, write nu
I suspect that my submissions here will be much like those of a lot of
other less-experienced users who don't subscribe to the dev-lists, but
spreading the poll to other lists, like 'support', could get pretty
chaotic...
> [ ] I am an editor of LFS or one of the related projects
> [ ] I use LFS
[ ] I am an editor of LFS or one of the related projects
[X] I use LFS as my primary Linux system
[X] I use LFS on more than one PC (including virtual machines)
[X] I deviate a lot from LFS (not counting package updates as deviations)
[X] I deviate a lot from BLFS (not counting package updates as d
Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
>
> [~] I am an editor of LFS or one of the related projects
> [X] I use LFS as my primary Linux system
> [ ] I use LFS on more than one PC (including virtual machines)
> [ ] I deviate a lot from LFS (not counting package updates as deviations)
> [ ] I deviate a lot fr
I wrote:
(recording my own vote)
> [X] I am an editor of LFS or one of the related projects
> [ ] I use LFS as my primary Linux system
> [X] I use LFS on more than one PC (including virtual machines)
> [ ] I deviate a lot from LFS (not counting package updates as deviations)
> [X] I deviate a lot
[X] I am an editor of LFS or one of the related projects
[X] I use LFS as my primary Linux system
[X] I use LFS on more than one PC (including virtual machines)
[ ] I deviate a lot from LFS (not counting package updates as deviations)
[~] I deviate a lot from BLFS (not counting package updates as d
Alexander E. Patrakov schrieb:
>
> [ ] I am an editor of LFS or one of the related projects
> [x] I use LFS as my primary Linux system
> [x] I use LFS on more than one PC (including virtual machines)
> [ ] I deviate a lot from LFS (not counting package updates as deviations)
> [ ] I deviate a lot
Note: [X] is "yes, yes I do" while [~] is "depends on the system, but
mostly no".
[ ] I am an editor of LFS or one of the related projects
[X] I use LFS as my primary Linux system
[X] I use LFS on more than one PC (including virtual machines)
[~] I deviate a lot from LFS (not counting package upd
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
> [X] I am an editor of LFS or one of the related projects
> [X] I use LFS as my primary Linux system
> [X] I use LFS on more than one PC (including virtual machines)
> [ ] I deviate a lot from LFS (not counting packag
- Original Message -
From: "Alexander E. Patrakov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "LFS Developers Mailinglist" ; "BLFS
Development List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, March 03, 2008 10:55 AM
Subject: Poll about package management
> Please reply to this message (please, limit this to the lf
On Monday 03 March 2008 03:55:35 Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
> Please reply to this message (please, limit this to the lfs-dev list
> only) and mark with "X" the items that apply. If the answer is not
> the same on your different Linux systems, write numbers of systems to
> which each answer appli
Alexander E. Patrakov wrote:
> Please reply to this message (please, limit this to the lfs-dev list
> only) and mark with "X" the items that apply. If the answer is not the
> same on your different Linux systems, write numbers of systems to
> which each answer applies instead of a simple "X" mark.
49 matches
Mail list logo
