On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 09:10:40PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote: > > X, IMHO--or, vain opinion, whatever you like--is the root of all > dependency evil. And, this is particularly true for server deployments. > We really need to find a "core" that compiles without all the bloat > and cruft that comes with X. LFS--and to some extent--the idea behind > BLFS is so great for a server deployment, due to the cleanliness, but > all that goes out the window when X is in the picture. I think a good > first goal is to find a "Core" that can be complete divorced from all this. > > Let the desktop users decide how they want to recompile everything if > they want X support. Emacs builds fine (or at least, used to, back in > my day) without X. It also builds with X. Similarly, to the extent > that some packages depend on X, let's first try to excise them from > "Core", and, if not possible, to create a separate "build" (or build > instructions) that can be released without dependencies to X. > Ah, a minimalist early-1990s "desktop", from the days when xfree86 was too difficult for mere mortals to build. I'm sure both of the people who don't use xorg on their desktops will be overjoyed by your plans.
And no, I don't think that xorg has any place on a server, but even those of us using minimalist desktops (I prefer icewm) expect a bit more than what you are offering. In case it isn't obvious, I don't see how your "minimalist server" build is going to satisfy most BLFS users. 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
