On Fri, Nov 04, 2011 at 01:44:33PM -0500, Randy McMurchy wrote: > On 11/4/2011 1:14 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote: > > Besides, building LFS/BLFS *is* programming. You still go through an > > edit, build, check process. The output of a programming process is not > > always executable code. > > Not at all trying to argue, but for the sake of discussion I think it is > a stretch to say that writing a book (with insertion of XML markup) is > programming. > > <para>Lots of nice text describing anything, could even be fictional > material as well.</para> > > The above (in my opinion) hardly qualifies as "programming". However, it > matters not where each package is located, as long as it is in the TOC, > it is easy to find. :-) > Totally agree. Also pkg-config, like cmake, is a tool used in building. Mind you, things like nasm, gcc-3 (almost certainly now obsolete), perl modules, python modules, and (arguably) Python itself are mainly in the book because they are build dependencies.
longindex.html good, index.html prone to causing disagreement :-) 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
