El Sábado, 6 de Mayo de 2006 21:35, Randy McMurchy escribió:
> I can certainly see optional installation features to be tagged
> somehow or another as optional. And 'role="docs"' may end up being
> adopted. That way, for jhalfs builds, one would only have to say
> docs=yes or docs=no or whatever flag you guys use and then everywhere
> there is optional docs installation, it would turn it on or off.
Thanks for thinking on jhalfs support.
I need yet to rethink how to integrate BLFS into it after the big jhalfs
changes and feartures additions that we are doing now for {C,H}LFS.
I hope to have something better than the current implementation before BLFS
release. This is a must now due that nALFS profiles are no longer
maintained.
> But as Manuel said, we could discuss it and implement it when and
> if it is ever desired.
Yes. I prefer to not polute the sources with not discussed and documented tags
and/or attributes.
--
Manuel Canales Esparcia
Usuario de LFS nº2886: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org
LFS en castellano: http://www.escomposlinux.org/lfs-es http://www.lfs-es.com
TLDP-ES: http://es.tldp.org
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
