On 13 March 2018 at 16:11, Bruce Dubbs <bruce.du...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 03/13/2018 04:49 AM, Richard Melville wrote:
>> On 8 March 2018 at 17:15, Hazel Russman <hazeldeb...@googlemail.com
>> <mailto:hazeldeb...@googlemail.com>> wrote:
>>     On Thu, 8 Mar 2018 10:11:23 -0600
>>     Bruce Dubbs <bruce.du...@gmail.com <mailto:bruce.du...@gmail.com>>
>>     wrote:
>>     > >Ken Moffat wrote:
>>     > > I admire your optimism that you will be able to build (what I
>> assume
>>     > > is) a desktop system without python2.
>>     >
>>     > Hazel,
>>     >
>>     > python is mentioned in 176 files in BLFS, but only 42 of those are
>>     > python3.   In any reasonable workstation system, both versions will
>> be
>>     > needed.  If you are creating a server of some type (file, web,
>> database,
>>     > mail, etc) you might be able to avoid python2.
>>     >
>>     >    -- Bruce
>>     I'll have to install it then, as a graphical desktop is essential.
>>     But two pythons still looks to me like bloat. In all my previous
>>     builds, I've been able to avoid python3 altogether. On the other
>>     hand, I must say I'm impressed with ninja. I built glib yesterday
>>     and it took only a fraction of the time it used to take using make.
>> Hazel, a little late in replying, I know, but I agree, it is annoying to
>> have to install two versions of Python.  Of course, the Python Community
>> would say that there is only one version of Python now and that is Python 3.
>> This reminds me of the IPv4/IPv6 issue; IPv6, like Python 3, has been
>> around for some considerable time, and yet we are still wedded to IPv4.
>> The problem is that, although new and improved versions of software, or
>> protocols, are released, it is not possible to force everybody to use
>> them.  Maybe laziness plays a part, or familiarity with the old, or just
>> simple economics.
> About IPv6; If you are doing NAT within a local network, IPv4 is just
> easier to comprehend. is just easier to understand than
> 2600:3c01::f03c:91ff:fe70:25e8 (higgs).
> In addition, some ISPs, at least here in the US, do not offer an IPv6
> address or address range.

The situation is even worse here in the UK with very few ISPs offering
IPv6.  We were lucky enough to find a good ISP that gave us a /48 IPv6
block.  This enabled us to create a pure IPv6 network and use a NAT64
translator (https://www.jool.mx/en/index.html) to access the Web, which, of
course, is still predominantly only IPv4 aware.  Having such a large IPv6
block (~ 1.2 septillion addresses) we didn't need NAT in the traditional

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?


Reply via email to