Jeremy Huntwork wrote these words on 07/31/05 10:17 CST: > However, we chose to used that particular build method over BLFS's as > it's the officially suggested and supported method and it makes it easy > to maintain with the numerous configure options kept neatly in a > separate file. From my conversation with other random LFS users, I'd > gather that most (especially those who have been doing this for a while) > don't use BLFS's build-method for Firefox either.
Funny you say this. Many, many months ago I spent hours building both Firefox and Thunderbird over and over and over again. And these are 25 minute builds each time on my test machine. Tedious did not begin to describe it. At the end of my research, where I determined both build methods produce the same binaries, I posed a question to the -dev list and asked should we continue to use CMMI or use the Moz method. Everyone responded that the CMMI works for them, why change things? So it was left as a CMMI build. -- 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] [Linux 2.6.10 i686] 10:21:01 up 120 days, 9:54, 2 users, load average: 0.43, 0.91, 0.78 -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
