Kevin Buckley wrote these words on 11/21/07 10:58 CST:
> 
> I can't see that the LFS/BLF wiki is the place to add such stuff.

Where else would you suggest? The Wiki's original concept was to
provide a place where users in the community could document anything
not in the book that they feel would be worthwhile to others.

Originally, our Hints project was also for this sort of thing. In
fact, incorporating a PMS (package management system) would be
perfect for a hint (there are hints already for some types of PMS)


> Taking the HTML of the official books and coddling it is not that
> hard, though it would be
> nice if there were a couple of extra environments especially for
> displaying USER additions
> (I guess this is akin to the  "template for the Wiki" notion that is
> doing the rounds in this
>  thread).

Not sure what you mean by "coddling" the HTML (perhaps you meant
XML?). Currently, you must have editing permissions to make mods
to the actual book. That's why the Wiki was incorporated, as anyone
can put info there.


> Similarly, folk who only want parts of the BLFS book's packages should
> be encouraged to
> show exactly what they needed to do, and what they were able to leave
> out so that folk who
> come along after benefit from their experience.

Not sure what "leave out" is in this context. We don't expect anyone
to build all of BLFS. It should be made clear that BLFS is pick and
choose just the packages you wish to install.


> It strikes me that the LFS/BLFS wiki could end up becoming snowed
> under with listinsg of
> individual quirks as opposed to being a "document" that moves towards
> a "consensus
> on experience or fact".

This is a tough one. What is "fact" is arbitrary. What may be fact
for one user, is totally wrong for another. That is why in BLFS
there are instructions to properly build the package, and in some
cases some configuration choices are presented. The info in BLFS
should work for 99.9% of users as the BLFS instructions are very
generic on purpose.

I realize the thought here on your part is to be able to present
some additional information that worked for you or some other
user/group. But then it may be wrong for others. It has been
BLFS' goal to simply present working instructions that can be
implemented into each user's custom installation technique.


> The folk who produce the LFS/BLFS  spend a lot of time making sure
> that ALL the packages
> they list will compile if the instructions therein are followed,
> however there must be a whole
> load of other LFS/BLFS  installtions working perfectly that didn't
> quite follow the official
> books to the letter but which may have great relevance for some users.

Of course. BLFS is just a starting point. But again, what one person
thinks is invaluable and a "must have", would be totally wrong for
another user.


> If these individual quirks were, instead, "somewhere out there on the
> internet" in an
> LFS/BLFS form that made the differences, between them and the vanilla
> books, obvious
> then I believe that would be a gain for the LFS/BLFS  community as a whole.

Granted, it would. But could something like that be maintainable?
If the scenario you present was implemented, it seems there would
be 100 BLFS books, each with its own peculiarities. Users would
have to spend quite a bit of time browsing each one just to find
out what would be best for them.

The LFS/BLFS experience is highly based on educating folks about
building from source. Following someone else's recipe would curb
that education somewhat. We kind of hope that with the BLFS book
showing good basic compilation instructions, the reader/user will
incorporate that into his/her own way of doing it.

Sure, there becomes a time where the education benefit is long
gone after doing a couple of LFS/BLFS builds, and there is what
this discussion is all about. How do we document a known working
environment for a specific task/project?

I've skirted answering this question (and the main thrust of this
thread), as I simply don't have a good answer. The Wiki is the
best I can come up with so far.


> Perhaps what might be needed is a BLFS chapter that explains to the
> user how to go about creating, and placing where it can be seen, a
> ULFS or ILFS  ( User LFS     Individual LFS)
> book ?

Such a section could be valuable, and anyone that makes a serious
attempt at producing some initial text for a section like this
would be great. I'll make time to get something into the book, if
others will create the initial draft.


> Hoping this adds something to the discussion,

Yes, each and every message in this thread has been well thought
out and informative. I hope the thread continues, and someone
(or a team) can jump in and create something.

-- 
Randy

rmlscsi: [bogomips 1003.23] [GNU ld version 2.16.1] [gcc (GCC) 4.0.3]
[GNU C Library stable release version 2.3.6] [Linux 2.6.14.3 i686]
11:56:00 up 8 days, 2:27, 1 user, load average: 0.18, 0.22, 0.14
-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Reply via email to