Recently, Somebody Somewhere wrote these words
> On Sat, Sep 24, 2005 at 04:42:36PM -0500, Dan McGhee wrote:
> >
> > I thought I remembered some words in LFS or BLFS about removing
> > sources, but, except for the clean-up in LFS, I can't find anything.
> > Am I just paranoid or should I turn 'rm -R <dir>' loose. I figure I
> > should save "config.cache." Anything else?
>
> It sounds like you are talking about extracted and built source trees
> and not tarballs. If this is the case, yes you can remove them. The
> only purpose they would serve is for comparison when encountering
> errors and such.
>
> > Oh BTW, since kernel headers are installed separately now, is there
> > any reason to keep the kernel source tree around?
>
> Very little. There is the occasional package that looks in there, but
> those packages are few and far between anymore. Worse case scenario is
> just that you have to unpack the kernel before building something.
I delete sources routinely. You need some (tcl for tk, binutils for
something else etc.) Unless you are adding X components, keep the kernel
and delete the rest. 'rm -rf' away.
If you use modules, remember the source & build symlinks in the module
tree. These point at the kernel.
--
With best Regards,
Declan Moriarty.
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
