On Tue, Mar 14, 2006 at 09:53:24AM -0800, Dan Nicholson wrote: > > My new idea is that I will put the reverse patch (to use Man) in the > patches repo in the event that it would ease a backwards transition. > No mention would be made on the page. It would just be like any of > the other myriad patches that people can scrounge for in the patches > repo.
Excuse the late reply. I've been away for a bit on holiday. I don't see the reasons for keeping a reverted patch around as being very useful. If we need to put the script back to its original state, we have the script in SVN or the stable BOOK, or any number of locations. If the assumption is that the LFS book is being followed, and that BLFS SVN targets LFS SVN, then there isn't a user-related reason for the patch, either. IMO, there would need to be a much stronger reason for putting text into the book about this than has been proposed. -- Archaic Want control, education, and security from your operating system? Hardened Linux From Scratch http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/hlfs -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
