On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 12:53:09AM -0700, Qrux wrote: > > Perhaps. But from the POV of a "vertical" (or "domain") like "production > server" that prefers--or even requires--a "release" structure of releasing > software (as opposed to being told to use the dev version out of SVN because > it's probably in better shape), BLFS is working hard--but not exactly > succeeding. > Just out of interest, who is going to be responsible for the security updates on your production server ? In other distros, there are security teams. In BLFS, editors have applied the fixes to the development book if they see fit (although, ISTR putting some security fixes into the 6.3 release).
In general, BLFS avoids "development" versions of packages (with some exceptions, e.g. mutt and now, probably, bc) so -dev is fairly well placed for a stable system. ĸen -- das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
