Randy McMurchy wrote:
First, you have to define "what is needed". Only then could one even
begin to consider removing or adding packages to the base LFS system.
This question comes up every now and then (for good reason). It was
decided, and most people have agreed, that we try to maintain this
definition of a base LFS system. It's neither right or wrong, it's just
*something* to go by.
In its very simple form:
1) A finished LFS system should be a fully functioning basic Linux system.
2) The nature of LFS is to have to build from source code, so a base LFS
system also is a well-rounded development system.
What exactly constitutes a well-rounded development system is very much
left open to interpretation. Every person will likely have a different
view. Some will consider Perl part of this, some don't. Some will
consider Ada part of it, some won't.
So we stick with the basics. C and C++ compiler because you can't live
without them when compiling source code. Autoconf and Automake as well
for reasons outlined before. Perl becomes a dependency because
/usr/bin/automake is a perl script. However, even without automake I
would still consider Perl a basic element of a development system.
There's quite a few Perl things out there. Enough to call it almost
quite common a language.
--
Gerard Beekmans
/* If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem */
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
