Preparing for nALFS 1.3 release

Jamie Bennett jamie at linuxfromscratch.org
Sat Feb 7 13:35:24 PST 2004


On Sat, 2004-02-07 at 17:42, Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
> With the changes that have been made recently and will be finished in 
> the next week or two, I'm considering readying a 1.3 release of nALFS. 
> At this point, the changes are:
> 
> - DTD syntax 3.2 for <patch>, <remove>, <download> and <unpack>
> - bug fix for static building with unusual ncurses installation
> - DTD syntax 3.1 for <if>/<then>/<else>
> - DTD syntax 3.2 for <if>/<then>/<else>/<and>/<or>/<not>

I think the changes we have made (mostly your changes ;) warrant a 1.3
release.

> The additional Bugzilla entries I'd like to address for 1.3 would be:
> 
> #636 - extending search_replace (which most likely will be done by 
> incorporation the use of PCRE or regex libraries to eliminate the 
> parsing code in nALFS)

Agree.

> #641 - adding a config file option to specify the shell to be used for 
> executing commands

Not overly concerned on this one, does anyone actually want this?

> #696 - template handler

needed but handlers vary wildly and a generic handler may be hard to
produce.

> #645 - <shell> element inside <execute>, to support script blobs in a 
> profile

Could be useful but again I wouldn't consider it a stumbling point on
the way to 1.3. 

> The DTD will be up-to-date with these changes, and will be released as 
> version 3.2 at the same time as nALFS 1.3 is released.
> 
> Questions for the community:
> 
> - are there other Bugzilla entries that you feel are important enough to 
> hold off on a 1.3 release?

Ok, my thoughts on the current bugzilla,

I'd like to see bug #604 (LSB stuff) either removed or have its priority
changed.

#609 seems a small but nice change to have completed. I haven't looked
in to it so there may be more to it. Also applies to #638 and #642

I'd like to see #611 done for the next release (maybe one for me).

Will #627 ever be considered? Should be removed otherwise. Also applies
to #640.

#633 needs to be discussed sooner rather than later as more useful 
applications could be produced if a standard was agreed on. I see a 
great perl is-installed script there.

...
Jamie Bennett		-	jamie at linux from scratch dot org







More information about the alfs-discuss mailing list