--- Em sáb, 28/4/12, Bruce Dubbs <[email protected]> escreveu: > De: Bruce Dubbs <[email protected]> > Assunto: Re: [blfs-dev] sane and xsane > Para: "BLFS Development List" <[email protected]> > Data: Sábado, 28 de Abril de 2012, 18:33 > Fernando de Oliveira wrote: > > > Libpng 1.5.10 - March 29, 2012 (apparently, this is the > release date). > > LOL. I meant the XSane version. > > > I do not yet feel confident enough to replace my host > by LFS. Did it in > > another machime (LFS6.7), but it was a PITA, regarding > NVidea, Broadcom and > > VMware, worse yet when upgrading the kernel, NV and VM > had to be taken into > > account and reconfigured (this is not the best word, > hope you understand) of > > course more a problem of these than LFS/BLFS. But I > will try to learn jhalfs > > (remember?) in some days maybe weeks, make a partition > in the host for LFS > > and then I will be able to help more. > > The nice thing about LFS is that you don't have to > upgrade. I still use my > system built in 2005 every day. I did upgrade the > kernel, but it is still > 2.6.22.5. There is no need to update just because a > new version of something is > released. I think you need some kind of missing > capability or indicated error > before updating. > > BTW, the LFS main server is still running Linux 2.6.18 > without issues. When we > update the server HW, we will do a complete refresh of the > sw. > > > My intention and goal is to eventually leave other > distribuitions just to > > follow and see what is happening, and rely entirelly in > LFS/BLFS even as > > host. > > > > So, please, do not give up. People like me would have > much more difficulty to > > achieve such a goal (see above) if packages so > important as xsane/sane keep > > being dropped from the book. > > I looked at http://www.sane-project.org/sane-mfgs.html. > There's a lot of > support for old hw, but I'm not sure about newer hw. > > There's a couple of problems with keeping packages in the > book. First is hw > compatibility. If we don't have the hw to test, then > how can we reasonably keep > it in the book? Your problem, for instance, is > complicated by the fact you are > using virtual hosts. Accessing hw in virtual hosts > really is going beyond the > scope of BLFS. > > The second problem is with limited use and old > software. If a package is no > longer being updated and it doesn't build with newer > libraries, how can we > reasonably keep it in the book? > > Another example. We have three mail servers in the > book: sendmail, postfix, and > exim. How many people really need any mail > server? My system has: > > $ cat /usr/bin/sendmail > #!/bin/bash > # sendmail dummy > echo $@ > > Gereral desktop users really only need email clients like > Thunderbird or mutt. > Sometimes you need a way to send mail out only via a script > but that is > generally a limited situation, but a full blown mail server > requires a publicly > available IP address and few people have that. Given > that, why maintain three > different servers? We really don't have a decent way > to fully test mail > servers. Right now Leafnode (NNTP) needs an > update. I don't know how to test > that or even if anyone uses NNTP any more. > > Everyone doing updates to BLFS in the last 6 months has been > doing a great job, > but as we get to the last few apps that have not been > updated, these problems > start to come up and the only viable option I see is to drop > them rather than > leave in obsolete instructions. > > I am, of course, open to other ideas, but I just don't know > how to handle these > problems right now. > > -- Bruce >
Bruce, The machines were off, but I turned this one on, just to thank for this message, tomorrow will reply properly, will try to solve xsane png problem, perhaps only after will reply this. []s, Fernando -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
