Justin R. Knierim wrote: > IMO, with the old scripts we wouldn't have been any better off. Trying > to add packages, patches, etc to the old Makefiles is so much more ugly > and complex than the new Makefiles. Also IMO, new releases of the > LiveCD are a given, as LiveCD depends on so many external elements like > the ftp packages repo, nALFS, now jhalfs and of course LFS. We would > have needed a 6.1.1-2 release with the old makefiles also. Changes > happen....new releases are required. I got chewed out enough in > #lfs-support for not releaseing a 6.1-4 LiveCD since it contained a lot > of bugs also, including not being able to build nALFS with the included > packages.
It wasn't the scripts themselves I was worried about - it was the introduction of new unknowns. Anyway, that's all water under the bridge. > Yes, and I am more confident about 6.1.1-2. I employed a team of > volunteer testers on the list and in #lfs-support who tested the beta > versions of 6.1.1-2 with me, and helped immensly with finding new bugs. > So, we should be back in business. The 6.1.1-2 release is out and has > been announced. You're doing a good job - my reaction before was just that: a reaction. I should have looked in the repo before saying anything. Sorry again, and thanks again for being on top of this stuff. -- JH -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/livecd FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
