On Fri, Feb 09, 2018 at 11:17:59PM -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Ken Moffat wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 09, 2018 at 08:52:26PM -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> > > 
> > > I thought I fixed that, but upon research, it never made it into the book.
> > > 
> > > http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/pipermail/blfs-dev/2018-February/033951.html
> > > 
> > > Short answer:
> > > 
> > > sed -i '/int memfd_create/,+2 d' src/pulsecore/memfd-wrappers.h
> > > 
> > > 
> > >    -- Bruce
> > Does that not break the build for anyone who started their LFS build
> > just before 2.27 went into LFS ?  If so, are you saying that
> > BLFS-svn is only for people using *current* LFS ?
> BLFS-svn should reflect LFS-svn, no?
>   -- Bruce

It's nice not to break things for people who maybe have slower
machines and do other things apart from building LFS/BLFS.

In the past I have said that anybody who cares about security ought
to at least look at the changes in BLFS-svn, and for some of them
Douglas or I have flagged them as security fixes (for other package
releases the security aspect only comes to light later).

Saying that everybody should use a version of the book at a
particular point in time allows vulnerabilities to spread.  Saying
that people should update both LFS and BLFS to the current versions
increases their workload and reduces the audience.  And for a glibc
minor version increase the LFS approach is to make a completely new

There is enough churn of package versions without deliberately
making things harder for everyone.

Truth, in front of her huge walk-in wardrobe, selected black leather
boots with stiletto heels for such a barefaced truth.
                                     - Unseen Academicals
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Reply via email to