On Sat, Jul 27, 2019 at 12:38:28AM +0100, Ken Moffat wrote: > On Fri, Jul 26, 2019 at 05:38:07PM -0500, Bruce Hill wrote: > > http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/systemd/prologue/errata.html > > refers the reader to please visit > > http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/errata/systemd/ before proceeding with > > your build, which gives a "Page not found!" Clicking on the "contact the > > webmaster" http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/website has the same > > page/text as the errata/systemd page. > > > > Is this a typo? There is other systemd errata, though the latest seems to > > be: > > http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/errata/stable-systemd/ > > > > Bruce > But what would you expect to see in the errata for the development > books ? The current versions are always assumed to be ok, subject to > fixes from pending tickets, but from time to time there are problems.
I would expect no link to errata if there is not going to be errata for the 'development' book. > In this cycle there turned out to be issues with a meson version, > and for a while that was reverted. These sort of things are usually > mentioned on the appropriate -dev lists. > > Similarly with vim-8.1 : that is, I think, mentioned in the stable > errata. Similarly for kernel versions with exploitable problems > which have been publically disclosed. So, if you are using an "old" > development snapshot then certainly some of the release errata might > apply. > > But for everything else in the current books, unless an open ticket > (check trac for LFS and BLFS) has a priority of high (or greater) > then everything is assumed to be ok. This seems more appropriate than a link to something non-existent. Maybe one of the book editors might consider changing it to, "If there is any errata, it will be published on the lfs-dev mailing list <http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-dev/>." > I have previously said that people following the dev books should at > least monitor the -dev lists. You should publish that in the book where it would be read. > Normally, the dev book is not > recommended for a first build, but after that - if you wish to use > the dev version, fine - but please be aware of security issues (we > editors might not always be aware of them, particularly in BLFS), > and keep an eye on the dev lists. I've only done one build, and the dev book was the only one with software update enough for my host OS. There's not beans worth of difference between the stable book and the dev book, except (a) the software versions, and (b) the dev book gets updated at random. > ĸen Bruce -- There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance — that principle is contempt prior to investigation. 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? Don't top-post: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_post#Top-posting -- 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
