> From: Bruce Dubbs <[email protected]> > Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2016 13:46:11 -0500 > Subject: Re: [lfs-dev] s6 > > Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
(-top posting) > > Hi Bruce > > > For me, one of the things that stands out is the way it approaches process > > supervision, i.e., not trying to manage/understand state of a service via > > shell scripts and pid files. Are there still parts of the community here > > that are active with more experimental topics? I think it's fairly clear that there are still many and varied things being done os-wise by many & varied list-subscribed folks; including healthy interests in such things that are outwith *lfs, and that often feed back into it. > > There is not as much experimentation as there used to be. Editor > participation has dropped and it's about all we can do to keep up with > upstream changes to what is in BLFS now. LFS is not as large (about 10% > of BLFS) and we can get by with about 2-3 updates per month and still stay > pretty current. BLFS has, on average, about 4 packages updated every day, > weekends included. That's counting things like kf5, kf5-apps, and plasma > as one package. The biggest mover for apps seems to be gnome. The > systemd version of the book has a full gnome environment (not fully in > sysv due to gnome's insistence on systemd) and that seems to have a lot of > churn. In any case, there are about 800 packages in BLFS and if they each > updated only once a year, that would still be almost 3 per day. > For the packages tracked, what are the stats for changes in x.y.z.w , for each of x,y,z,w : it may be useful to ticket and obtain z,w changes; but just not necessarily update the book for all z,w changes; and instead just do periodic ones, and bisect if any issues. akh -- -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
