djb utilities

Erika Pacholleck pchllck at
Mon May 5 22:25:51 PDT 2003

[05.05.2003] Stefan Krah <-- :
> You could install everything as DJB wishes without affecting other
> packages.
> I could imagine the following scenarios:
> 1. Leave everything as it is
> ============================
> 4. Go all the way and use /service, /command, /package and /usr/local
> =====================================================================

To my view there are only those two, either you stick to LFS or you do
it completely the DJBs way. And as a standard (B)LFS built needs /etc
to be writable anyways, your

> 2. Compromise - use /var/service instead of /etc/service
> ========================================================

seems out of question to me.

Back to the original question, I think the question is not whether BLFS
does DJB a disservice or not, but whether it does its readers a
disservice by forcing one method only. Treating both the readers and DJB
fair, means for me to point out the inconsistancies and leave the reader
the choice.

But if it is an either/or decision which method goes into BLFS, I would
choose to change everything so it fits into a standard LFS system. BLFS
is at least connected to LFS and this method surely needs more things
to consider then just a normal install-triple - and readers will not
run into "you are missing this and that" when trying it without help.

Erika ...---...: pacholleck at nexgo dot de
Unsubscribe: send email to listar at
and put 'unsubscribe blfs-dev' in the subject header of the message

More information about the blfs-dev mailing list