Paul Rogers wrote:
Apologies, I fumbled this reply a moment ago. It wasn't ready and
should be removed.
We've never been completely minimalist.
Neither am I! But my mantra is KISS; above impatience. I really don't
care about boot times. That's never more than a miniscule fraction of
my total wait time.
Sytemd definitely violates my idea of KISS! I'm sticking with SysV.
Yes, me too.
Nobody uses my boxes but me. I've never seen any point to extended
attributes, nor ACLs. Just more complications for what gain? Why does
LFS base need them--the book doesn't explain,
If we were, we'd remove vim, among others.
Yeah, I've only used it a few times, under extreme duress. But there
needs to be *some* editor in the LFS base, and vim is expected.
Vim is very powerful. But, you can always use emacs or ed if you prefer.
I'll note that we do not mention LFS packages in BLFS as dependencies
at all, so there may be some BLFS packages that may cause problems is
you skip some LFS packages.
Yes, I read that argument in the May '14 list. But I don't understand
the rationale for moving them into the lfs base. I know they, and the
XML::Parser, are often needed in BLFS, but agreed with akheizer that
isn't enough reason.
What is the requirement for attr/acl/libcap in lfs? Systemd was the
suggestion I read. But that's not part of lfs--unless that's where
LFS is going.
Why can't they be installed as part of BLFS? They used to be.
When we went to two books, we wanted to keep them as close together as
possible. If you don't want attr/acl/libcap/XML::Parser/intltool, then
don't install them. You probably don't need kbd or kmod either. If you
really want to go small, don't install man-db or man-pages.
Your distro, your rules.
Did you see Section v, .Rationale for Packages. and Appendix C,
'Dependencies' in the Book?
-- Bruce
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
Do not top post on this list.
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style
