ALFS Status: Past and future [was Re: new guy, newbie questions.]

Felipe Contreras al593181 at mail.mty.itesm.mx
Sat Jan 19 18:58:17 PST 2002


On Sat, Jan 19, 2002 at 02:42:20PM -0800, Jesse Tie-Ten-Quee wrote:
> So, I do not plan on ignoring anyone.  That, as you mentioned would be a
> true waste.  But at the same time, i'm not going to spend 6 months,
> debating about the best way to go, the best implementation or the best
> syntax.  I am sick and tired of it, i've been doing it for nearly two
> years.. i hope that doesn't make me look like i have no patience.  I've
> actually gained quite alot latelly, but the fact is, it's better to
> start with something and build on it, then have nothing to show for 6
> months of work.  Because... in reality we have nothing to show for the
> last 2 years, perhaps the only thing that we do have is the very old
> syntax we had prototyped. (which we never had plans to use for longer
> then a few months.. which is still being used)

As I have worked very hard for my own project since some time I think my
opinion whould be good at least to hear it.

I don't want to be pessimist, but I want to express my feeling that the
current ideas is not the right way. I like the idea of xml profiles, but
I think there should be more processing, lot's of things can be guessed
by some code and generate the finall commands to run.

There should be less hardcoded information so for example just having
"mcrypt" might install mcrypt with the defaults for every package. If no
more information is provided why not to guess it? We are talking about
an "automated" system, why no to make it smart an think the most it can
in order to help us?

There can even be different levels of processing an the corresponding
information can be stored somewhere. This requieres a little bit more
explanation but the point is that it's different to add a patch than
update the version.

Also I don't like C for bash stuff, I even tryied Python but I had no
luck. It seems bash was not done to interact with it, but that doesn't
mean it can't be done.

Most of the work I've done has been to make a good and smart design so I
don't have to type everything. That's why I don't like the current
xml format, you have to specify almost everything! It seems much more a
script with vars like BASH-VERSION=2.05.

I'll really like to work on ALFS, I even did a parser following an
approach that has alredy worked to me since a while, but no one except
Neven Has seems to care about my ideas. I'm sad you said "let's start
coding" since I don't like how stuff is going to be done, but anyway I
hope you have an open mind in order to accept new ideas, if not now,
later.

-- 
Felipe Contreras
-- 
Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
and put 'unsubscribe alfs-discuss' in the subject header of the message



More information about the alfs-discuss mailing list