Richard A Downing wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jan 2006 07:25:45 -0600
Randy McMurchy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Richard A Downing wrote these words on 01/10/06 03:26 CST:
On Mon, 09 Jan 2006 18:10:04 -0600
Randy McMurchy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The BDB dependencies have already been removed from SVN BLFS.
pity.
Well, actually, they have been commented out. It would be really
easy to
grep -lr 'linkend="db"/>' *
from the root of the XML tree and see every file that was touched. :-)
Perhaps I'm in a minority, but I would really quite like to see
dependencies on non-toolchain lfs packages in the BLFS. I realise it's
too much work, but it would be useful.
On the other hand, dependencies are such a complicated issue for
taxonomical reasons: required for build, required to run, recommended
to be installed before build, ditto for running, adds functionality,
provides an alternative to, etc.,etc..
We should perhaps not open this box.
R.
I'm in that minority too. I haven't suggested it because I know that
BLFS always assumes that you have a base LFS system including every
package in LFS, but it would still be nice to have all the dependency
information. Also, you'd probably have to draw a line somewhere as far
as how many dependencies you list - for example, do you really need to
list GCC, make, and glibc for every BLFS package?
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
