J
Maybe I am missing the obvious here...I don't see why that would throw
an error. The LiveCD uses /lfs-sources for the sources dir, is that the
problem? It is normally a good idea for the user to copy the sources to
/mnt/lfs/sources or whereever he wants them, because in chroot the
symlink won't work anymore...I believe.
The CD used to use /sources - and a lot of the people building LFS of
late appear to be having CD's that hold the sources in /sources. I can
only assume this has changed recently.
If a user interprets the book to mean build in /sources, then again it
won't work due to the read only file system.
I thought the book said to build in $LFS/sources but I could be wrong.
Will need to double check, but maybe the book itself needs to be tweaked
a bit.
Yup your spot on, but no-one reads that, or if they do they assume that
because the sources are in /sources - $LFS/sources is the same thing
(don't ask!!!)
The /usr/local/src doesn't matter to me. As long as the user can find
them. We will see what the rest of the LiveCD devs think.
Justin
Reading your responses to this mail, and my initial request, it again
makes me think we should take a harder line on this sort of weak
attitude as from what you've said, this problem should be even less of a
potential problem than I first thought when I asked....yet the problem
still arises.
Before I drop the work on lfs-livecd's door to fix the users ignorance
I'll rethink this. I'm loathed to change the book as its written out in
black and white, and even some fancy colours for the HTML version.
Thanks for the feedback,
Makes my think a re-think to the problem is needed.
Matt
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/livecd
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
