Moving to new format?
tushar at linuxfromscratch.org
Sat Jan 18 15:44:54 PST 2003
Billy O'Connor wrote:
>The problem with trying to force the new LFS book format onto BLFS, as
>I see it, is that the format was designed for different types of
>packages. All of the LFS packages follow more or less the same
>install format, ./configure && make && make install, with a few slight
>deviations. Many of the packages that we're installing in BLFS have
>quite complicated build instructions, and even more complicated
>Also, the new LFS format presents much *less* information to the user
>as they read along and install the packages, if anyone hasn't noticed.
>I don't want to hide away valuable information about the contents of
>the packages I'm writing about in an appendix that may or may not ever
>be looked at, I want it right on the same page as the build
Yep, actually even I am not for an 100% lfs like format for the blfs
book. My personal preference would be to leave most of the current
format as is. Except that merge the two sections "Installation" and
"Explainations" and make them more hint like.
Check out <http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~tushar/tmp/db.html> for an
example. The original page is at
Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
and put 'unsubscribe blfs-dev' in the subject header of the message
More information about the blfs-dev