the two package.ent files

Thomas Pegg thomasp at linuxfromscratch.org
Wed Jan 14 10:47:33 PST 2004


Jamie had brought this up last month, although we have not discussed it
since then, therefore I don't think we ever came to a final decision on
it. I agree that having the user modify the LFS-5.0.xml file is not the
best way, but at the time it was the easiest solution. I think my
suggestion of using to seperate config directories is the best, although
I'm biased on this, but the reason I think it's better is because the
user doesn't have to do much extra except decide which config directory
to choose from depending on wether they're using the packages tarball or
not. Maintenance of these two directories (config_seperate and
config_tarball) is not really that big of an issue, since only
config_seperate will be updated all the time, and the config_tarball
will only be updated when a new release of the LFS book happens and only
if something that was changed in the config_seperate also need to be
changed in config_tarball.

Note: I already created these directories in CVS (probably shouldn't
have), but I didn't go any further as to putting files in them until I
heard what you guys think about this solution. Plus I wanted to bring
this up before I finalized the next 5.0 profile tarball.
 
-- 
Thomas
LFS User : 4729
Linux User : 298329



More information about the alfs-discuss mailing list