Dan Nicholson wrote these words on 01/31/06 19:51 CST: > On 1/31/06, Joe Ciccone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>On the other hand, If it builds the same way, why remove Mozilla? I >>would just add sea monkey. > > Absolutely true, but I'm not the one doing the housekeeping around here.
Are you seconding the advocation of adding SeaMonkey to the book, yet keeping the Mozilla suite as well? This is what is sounds like. I would like to formerly disagree with this suggestion, though two have already suggested it (if I have Dan's thoughts correct). I just cannot see keeping a (probably dormant) version of a package, along with it's replacement in the book. If it turns out that SeaMonkey is just a fork, and that both continue to thrive, then perhaps, maybe, but it would take serious consideration to keep such *almost exact same packages* alive in the BLFS book. -- 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] 19:58:00 up 129 days, 5:22, 3 users, load average: 0.23, 0.21, 0.15 -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
