[RFC] The Future of the ALFS project

Thomas Pegg thomasp at linuxfromscratch.org
Mon Feb 27 20:19:40 PST 2006


Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
> 
> 
> I know George M (gmak) has done some great concept work with regards to 
> parsing the book with Bash alone. While I think this is great work, I 
> think the focus of any research in this line should be done in C and get 
> the alfs coding moving forward. jhalfs is good as an in-the-meantime 
> tool and while it could benefit from a bash-only parser, it doesn't 
> really *need* it at the moment.

It is does seem like something very cool, I haven't had a chance to play 
  with it, but on the surface it is very impressive.
> 
> I hesitated to say anything more about this to George because I didn't 
> want to discourage his work, he's done some great stuff so far. But now 
> that you've brought this up, Thomas, I think any further concept code 
> and energy should, if at all possible, be directed toward alfs.
I couldn't agree more.
> 
> To that end, unless George M. (or someone else) steps up to start really 
> moving on the alfs code, I can start spending any LFS time I have on it. 
> (This would necessarily mean that I'd have to temporarily neglect any 
> other fields, like LFS or LiveCD development.) Being that I'm at best 
> only an amateur with C, I'd gladly jump to second or third place behind 
> a more knowledgeable and energetic programmer. If I'm left to myself, 
> I'll probably move along slowly, but I'll do my best to keep the list 
> informed of any ideas/progress/road-blocks.

Please only do so if you really feel you want to, I don't necessarily 
want to see you neglect other things just for ALFS. But I leave that 
decision to you.


Thomas





More information about the alfs-discuss mailing list