Some packages I'd like to see added

Jeremy Utley jeremy at
Thu Dec 30 07:41:43 PST 2004

Randy McMurchy wrote:

> Jeremy Utley wrote:
>> My opinion would be that a lot of this stuff is essential for a 
>> release, but not necessarily for the SVN version of BLFS.  
> Again, we'll just need to A2D. The life cycle of BLFS is that as
> we near a release of LFS, SVN BLFS needs to be stable. Unlike LFS,
> where *every* package is tested by *every* user who install LFS,
> BLFS must keep things somewhat stable as it might be that only a
> handful or less people use the instructions.
> Of those, most who encounter a problem will simply do what it
> takes to fix it and not report anything and the issue remains.
Understood, but people with problems REALLY should be reporting them - I 
even tell people that even when they're deviating from the book and 
encounter a problem, to report that as well!  If they're not, then 
they're not being good community members.

> So, unlike LFS, BLFS needs to ensure the package instructions are
> good from the get-go. At least this is my feeling.
> I just had a message sent to me the other day from a long-time
> LFS community member. He says "I don't use BLFS instructions, as
> I build things my way". I've seen Tushar's build scripts, they
> vary from the book by a mile. With this in mind, I wonder how
> many people that are hard-core LFS'ers, actually use BLFS
> instructions. I know my builds vary from the instructions, but
> mostly adding parameters to configure.

Well, this is one hard-core LFSer who does use BLFS instructions 
wherever possible.  Mostly because of FHS issues (some packages are a 
pain to get into FHS-compliance, and I personally just don't feel like 
fighting that), and also because I *DO* like to be a good community 
member and report problems where I can, hence all the BLFS patches for 
GCC 3.4 compliance that ended up in the patches project because of my 
early work using that, the recent post about problems utilizing the 
newer version of libxklavier, and so on.  Rarely do I not follow BLFS 
for a package that's included.

This thread has gotten way off topic at this point.  I never meant for a 
simple suggestion of a few useful packages to evolve into this.  I was 
mostly thinking "Oh, here's something that's really missing from BLFS, 
and a way I could possibly help them out"


More information about the blfs-dev mailing list