Randy McMurchy([EMAIL PROTECTED])@Thu, Jan 05, 2006 at 01:21:15AM -0600:
> Chris Staub wrote these words on 01/05/06 01:10 CST:
Snip
>
Well,i wish we could see BLFS (which has the same importance with
LFS)in the same way we see LFS and i will try to expand my thought
with my poor english.
If we really want to find the solution to the problem,which btw and i will
venture a guess,it will get much worse in the near feature,we have to see
BLFS like a *non* existing project.
Think.What if we started this project right now?
Well i would like the *new* project,lets call it BLFS from now on :) to
foresee the feature in a way that will be easy to maintan even if it
reaches in an unpredictable growing level.
[parenthesis]
Honestly,it causes me pain and i really don't feel good when i see people like
you Randy (in fact especially you Randy) to carry such a heavy workload.
1.Updating packages.Well it's to so easy as it looks.New features,new
configure switches,keeping in sync with the current LFS-Dev-Book etc...
2.Closing/opening bugs,contributing patches etc...
3.Participation to the mailing lists
4.Increment versions,updating URLS.In that regard at least,the lazy user like
me,could contribute a little bit more.
5.Offering documentation to every level (what's the purpose of the
package,configuration items etc...)
[/parenthesis]
So the structure of the project has to be in a direction that would be a
littel more easy for everyone to contribute in certain levels.
I would like to see experienced/Knowledgeable people to concentrate into more
productive sections.
Example and also which is also the connection with the first paragraph.
+-------------------------------------------------+
|Think BLFS Book like a basic *toolchain*,ala LFS.|
+-------------------------------------------------+
My mail is already long,so i won't dare a diagram :) but i am sure you
got the idea.
I would go even more far by saying,that you (BLFS editors) and we
(the userbase) have to concentrate your/our efforts to create a L(B)FS
functional-pretty-modern-simple desktop.
So we can *Choose* certain packages (toolkit,browser,video-player,fileManager,
terminal,shell etc...)to interfere well with each other and create a desktop
environment that will be a pleasure to work with.
And leave the other packages for a wikki or for another unofficial book,which
also
could be the education field for new editors.
[Example]
I had the pleasure to find in my short way (2 years) in linux world,the
Fvwm window manager,which it has so many capabilities,that it can do
almost in 99%, everything that kde/gnome (with some thousands of
dependencies behind them)can do and even more than them.
But yes.You have to sacrifice a month or even more to tune it in your
way.
But imagine, *if* people much more smarter than me (which btw is the
majority in LFS community :)) would be envolved in such an effort ,what
they could create!!!
I would tell you for sure.You can do miracles with it.
[/Example]
But as i said,maybe this idea goes too far,but at least i spell it.
Another thing we can do is to work with functions and variables,even if
we make the life harder for some,but would be much more easy to
integrate them into scripts/tools like j(b)halfs.
[Example]
fetch foo-version -P $SOURCES_DIR
log foo-version
space foo-version
time foo-version
etc ...
[/Example]
We can also have a dedicated mailing list that also the common user can
post a new updated tested version of the foo package,if his/her set up has the
*prerequisites*,like the output of ...
=====
/sbin/ldconfig -V |head -n 1 |awk '{print $2 $3 " " $4}'|tr -d '()'
tr -d '()' < /proc/version | awk '{ print $5 " " $6 " " $7}'
ld -V |head -n 1
=====
so the people can save the attachment,make it executable,study it bla,bla..
Another thing.Why we have to use the /usr prefix instead of the default
/usr/local?
Let's leave the /usr to LFS,that will make easy also to have a separate
/usr/local partition.
Oh and another thing that we can win if we see BLFS as a toolchain and work
a little bit with the structure of the books (including LFS),is that
would be easy to create profiles such us.
Common Desktop use,multimedia workstation,mail server,bla,bla...
So that we can have quick and dirty what we really want.
In bottom line.
Why we don't try to win some time (especially the editors) to offer it
for documentation which is never enough,instead to update the book in a
cold manner?
And also to leave some time for playing basketball,climbing to the mountains
... :) making love etc...
Sorry for my long mail and ..
Best Regards
Agathoklis Hatzimanikas (for my long name) :).
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
