On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 08:25:12PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote: > > One thing to note is that my release proposal is just that, a proposal. > I'd like to get some agreement this is the right thing to do and the > approach is reasonable. > With the exception of delaying for the Mesa/libdrm/etc issue, I'd love to see a matched release. So far, the knock-on effects from recent LFS changes have been limited, at least in what *I* have built, but some things will always be unknown (e.g. automake-1.12 : it impacted agg-2.5, possibly will impact anyone running autofoo on other old packages).
If there is general agreement in BLFS, might be worth mentioning it on the other list ? Of course, it's always possible that a change from out of the blue in LFS will cause more problems - I remember make-3.82, I think it came quite late in the cycle for whichever version of LFS, and several BLFS packages were impacted. I really don't know for certain how much has not been tested recently. 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
