Richard A Downing wrote:
Bernd,
We've all tried to be friendly, but you are abusing our patience.
WILL YOU FOR GOTTS SAKE STOP TOP POSTING and learn how to trim your
quotes.
In addition, Bernd, please find an email client that does whatever is
necessary to allow sane clients to thread repli
On Wed, 21 Dec 2005 17:06:53 +0100
"Feldmeier Bernd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If you call this that way ok.
> But marking some packs as optional
> that is really educational in my mind.
>
> The user can decide wether to include that
> not essential stuff like devel-packs ...
>
>
Bernd,
We
LFS is source code based distro. So compilers are required. You can't
compare it to binary distros.
I would suggest you take what you like from LFS and Gregs DIY. Develop
a build environment and create what ever kind of binary image you
want. But you really shouldn't demand others to do all the wo
Randy
McMurchy
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 21. Dezember 2005 17:01
An: LFS Developers Mailinglist
Betreff: Re: AW: Community discussion: including any devel-tools in LFS
Chap. 6
Feldmeier Bernd wrote these words on 12/21/05 09:44 CST:
> absolutely not against the goal of LFS,
> because pointing out
Feldmeier Bernd wrote these words on 12/21/05 09:44 CST:
> absolutely not against the goal of LFS,
> because pointing out how a sane working
> system can be created has nothing to do
> with any dev-tools installed.
A "sane working system". Is this what you call a bare-bones
just-finished LFS bui
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 21. Dezember 2005 16:49
An: LFS Developers Mailinglist
Betreff: Re: AW: Community discussion: including any devel-tools in LFS
Chap. 6
Feldmeier Bernd wrote:
> Hi,
> Well, Archaic as subjected before
> we could discuss that.
>
> I think it is
> absolutely not a
Feldmeier Bernd wrote:
Hi,
Well, Archaic as subjected before
we could discuss that.
I think it is
absolutely not against the goal of LFS,
because pointing out how a sane working
system can be created has nothing to do
with any dev-tools installed.
Further more I would like to her
some comme
option like in Gregs great stuff.
regards Bernd
-Ursprüngliche Nachricht-
Von: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Auftrag von Archaic
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 21. Dezember 2005 16:34
An: LFS Developers Mailinglist
Betreff: Re: Community discussion: including any devel-tools in LFS
Chap. 6
On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 03:33:24PM +0100, Feldmeier Bernd wrote:
>
> This could really lead to a clean target rootfs approach
> without the need of any devel tools ...
Which would be completely against the stated goal of LFS.
--
Archaic
Want control, education, and security from your operatin
Hi all,
as asked before, why dont we devide chapter 6
packages into -- essential / devel (optional) packages??
The devel packages could be a sub chapter of LFS
chap 6 and marked as optional install.
packages e.g. gcc, perl ...
Doing so we can use the temp self hosted chroot
chap 5 toolchain/sys
10 matches
Mail list logo