Gerard Beekmans wrote: >> of the differences in the build methods. I'm all for LFS having support >> for other architectures, but they need to have the resources available > > > I'm only intending to support x86_64 type stuff as it's the main stream > new computer systems these days. I definitely do not plan on doing > anything with PPC, Sparc, RISC or something "fancy" like that. We don't > have the resources, which pretty much ends that discussion.
I mean no offense to you Gerard, but I get the feeling you said the above simply to keep the peace on this thread. Supporting other "fancy" architectures such as PPC isn't as difficult as you might think - and there has been many comments that adding a few other archs would actually draw more interest to LFS which, in turn, draws more hands for support. You should take a peek at this thread: http://linuxfromscratch.org/pipermail/lfs-dev/2007-October/060464.html There are interesting comments for both arguments there. -- JH -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
