On 1/20/07, Randy McMurchy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I'd like to mention the CLFS project in BLFS. Specifically, the > part of CLFS that has to do with the BLFS packages. Some questions: > > 1. Where in the book should it be mentioned that CLFS can be a > valuable resource?
That's a tough one. I think "Who'd Want to Read This Book" since it's the closest to "Intended Audience" in my mind. Maybe we need to add an explicit "Supported Architectures" section. That's really the rub, after all. I don't think it helps anyone to pussyfoot around the fact that LFS and BLFS only support one thing: x86. > 2. How do we refer to CLFS (sister-project, similar project, fork, > etc.) I'd say similar project extending the scope of supported architectures. Maybe the more friendly sister project. Dunno. > 3. Do others agree with me that CLFS is worth mentioning (especially > reflecting that CLFS includes stuff for multilib and X64 builds). > > I realize we (BLFS staff) are not prepared to support multilib > installations right now. But I do think CLFS should somehow, somewhere > be mentioned in the BLFS book. I absolutely agree. Even if you take multilib out of the equation, we still really only support x86. This way people can at least know that there's support available if that's not what they're using (PPC, for example). It sucks to have someone bang their head against the wall, write an email on blfs-support, and just get a one line "we don't do that" reply. At least they know there's other support possible. -- Dan -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
