On Tue, 10 Jul 2007 01:49:58 +0100
"Kevin Barlow" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Been reading the discussion on jhALFS being the new and improved ALFS
> program but I had loads of problems with it and couldn't figure it
> out. The readme wasn't much help ether.
>
>
>
> I've been using nALFS quite happily, even changed the XML to use a
> few new packages (GLIBC 2.3.6 mainly) and modified the xml for those
> packages that don't like parallel builds.
>
>
>
> Is their a good 'idiots guide' for jhALFS yet?
>
No and it's not suited to idiots (not suggesting that you are one -
particularly if you made nAlfs work for you! :-) )
My very recent experience is that it's currently very good for building
a straight 'Book' {,c}lfs, even svn, but the blfs part needs a lot of
fiddling. Almost every script that it builds needs editing, and in the
end it's just not worth the effort unless you want to help the devs. I
am impressed by the work to date though, it might well shape up in the
future if we keep testing it and feeding back.
BLFS is incredibly difficult to automate for a number of reasons, not
least the optionality (both location and dependency), the external (not
in book) dependencies, and the rapid rate of change.
R.
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
