David Jensen wrote these words on 07/15/05 11:02 CST: > Tushar Teredesai wrote: > >>Searching for the package is not as convinient as clicking on a link:) > > I agree, google isn't fun. If we can find a home or further > information link we should provide it. > Just to be complete, if for no other reason.
Well, I'd guess that 9 out of 10 BLFS packages are downloaded from the maintainer's site already. For these packages, listing the maintainer's web site link would be redundant. And for many of the packages I've updated in the last year or so, I've included a link to the home page (or other related docs) if I've felt that including this information was warranted. I think we should take Tush's suggestion on a case-by-case basis, and if providing a link to extra information is felt helpful by an Editor, then do it. However, I don't think we need to say that we should do it for each package as a matter of course. -- Randy rmlscsi: [GNU ld version 2.15.94.0.2 20041220] [gcc (GCC) 3.4.3] [GNU C Library stable release version 2.3.4] -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
