DJ Lucas wrote these words on 07/25/09 08:48 CST: > We absolutely need a way to track the pages that have been touched by a > quick glance approach.
I disagree. I will go through every package and either update Trac or add packages to it as I discover they are out of date. We'll use the Trac system. If there is a ticket, the package needs updating. If there's no ticket, the package doesn't need to be touched. Why does the book need to be touched for this? I don't think we need to go through updating packages such as TCPWrappers (I used that as an example of a package that has not had an update in quite a long time) and add that "it works with LFS 6.5". We'll know soon enough if it doesn't. > Finally, in light of the amount of work needed to be done, current LFS > editors should be given access to BLFS (if they don't have it already). > Anything that anyone can contribute, after LFS-6.5 is out the door, will > be greatly appreciated. You're only talking about Matt, and he's had BLFS access for years. > Any objections to any of the above? Yes, I don't want to update pages in the book saying "it works with such and such". Let's just use Trac. I will ensure each package is accounted for. -- Randy rmlscsi: [bogomips 1003.25] [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] 08:56:00 up 18 days, 21:24, 1 user, load average: 0.07, 0.10, 0.04 -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
