On Thu, Dec 27, 2018 at 10:38:09PM -0600, Bruce Dubbs via blfs-support wrote:
> On 12/26/2018 05:05 PM, Paul Rogers via blfs-support wrote:
> > I thought I was being clear, but apparently not. I am a contrarian from
> > your suggestion. I subscribe to the theory and rebuild everything every
> > time I build a new LFS. It's just easier that way. Machine cycles are
> > cheap, debugging time is expensive.
> >
>
> And we do that as a part of the release process for every *stable* version
> of BLFS, fixing issues as we go. Of course that doen't catch every possible
> error. If you build packages in a different order or omit/include optional
> dependencies, results will probably differ. It really not possible to build
> everything using every combination of package order.
>
In addition, we have updated packages during the "package freeze",
even when there is no known need to do so (such as fixing
vulnerabilities), which means that the versions I have tested in the
pre-release testing might not be the same as those anybody else
tests.
ĸen
--
The Laird o’Phelps spent Hogmanay declaring he was sober,
Counted his feet to prove the fact and found he had one foot over.
-- Louis MacNeice, Bagpipe Music
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page