On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 08:12:56PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote: > Ken Moffat wrote: > [...] > I'm sorry to hear this but I also understand. All that you have done is > much appreciated as will anything you may choose to do in the future. > > We each have to judge the amount of effort we put into whatever task we > take on. I do enjoy your posts and hope that you can continue to help > users as you have the time. > Thanks for the kind words. I'm still planning to help on -support, but only when I don't have to spend a lot of time assembling my reply.
> > At the moment, I'm preparing one of my irregular lists of what I've > > built, and in what order. > > My methodology is to create a script for each package. A part of the > common script that is included is to log each successful build with a > time stamp. That's just a little thing, but useful. > Yes, I've got the "main scripts" (for LFS ch5, ch6, and then for everything else a number of scripts, e.g. things to build before I boot, docbook, xorg+fonts+fluxbox+tk, etc) plus some functions for them to use (identify the directory name in a tarball, write space and time to a stamp, yadda, yadda). So, those tell me what I built But I then have to look at the individual package scripts to see which version I used, and any variations - e.g. this time I'm going to document how I configure some of the AV packages which need to be told to use certain things. Lots of detail, and some things are now worth doing differently, [ re my xulrunner/firefox issue on LFS-6.6 ] > Personally, LFS-7.0 is my cut off. > Understandable, but the main breakage before that is the altered bootscripts. I said in the past that I would try a "long term support" build on 6.6. In fact, it's almost impossible to keep the desktop packages updated for known vulnerabilities there, too much has changed and I'm not going to do a general rebuild. That box is now reserved for test uses (e.g. trying to build X32, maybe playing with other filesystems), although it is so slow compared to current hardware that I have some doubts. Meanwhile, it would be nice to have a current and working browser on two systems, so that I can use it while I recover the newer system from backups if I trash it :) [...] > > As with many packages, there are a lot of options that can be > configured. We can't test them all. It's really up to the package > developer to do a thorough checkout. I will update apache soon. > Thanks for doing that - I wasn't trying to indicate that it needed extra testing, only that my use of it is "limited". [...] > > 4. I'm also leaving gutenprint-5.2.9 out - > > That's a package I don't feel I can do properly. My printer understands > postscript and I don't need or use gutenprint. If nobody else does it, I'll get to it when I've built it with my new scripts and tried it in anger. I've actually got a script for rebuilding the printer stack, but it predates cups-1.6 and anyway needs a lot of thought if things go wrong, so I'm not planning to try that while 5.2.8 works on my own printer. 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
