[RFC] The Future of the ALFS project
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.
More information about the alfs-discuss