On 9/10/19 12:36 PM, Tim Tassonis via blfs-dev wrote:
Hi all
I noticed that initd-tools is gone from BLFS and seems to have been
replaced by lsb-tools. I also noticed that BLFS bootscripts have been
updated with tons of fixes for dependency information, so thanks for all
the work on that!
However, I noticed that lsb-tools is implemented in python3, which of
course is no problem for the book, as python3 is needed for meson/ninja
in lfs already.
My own personal problem is that my lfs/blfs-based distro does contain
initd-tools in the minimal install I use for my routers, but not
python3, and I'd like to keep it that way, for size and security reasons
(less software means less bugs).
So, what I wanted to ask:
In what functional way do the new python-based install_initd and
remove_initd differ from the old, c-based ones?
Will the old ones not be able to correctly manage the new BLFS init
scrips due to missing functionality?
And if not, what is missing from the old ones? I would then try to add
this to initd-tools, so I can still use those.
For a minimal install on a router why do you need to install a boot
script at all? For LFS based systems you can always use 'make
install=<package> from the bootscripts tarball.
Really, the only reason I know of to use install_initd is to support
some binary only package and even then you could insert the boot script
and symlinks on the rare times you would need it.
If you just need the lsb_release program, use the oldeer version.
-- Bruce
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
