BLFS release (?)

Randy McMurchy randy at
Fri May 9 03:00:38 PDT 2008

Alexander E. Patrakov wrote these words on 05/09/08 01:10 CST:

> And do we really need to get 6.3 out of the door? Essentially, without an errata 
> page, without the team tracking security issues and bugs, it will be just a 
> snapshot, not a proper distro release. Maybe versionless BLFS (i.e., "always use 
> svn") is the way to go?

I'd say for those building LFS Development, using BLFS SVN is a must.
And Alex's proposal is legitimate for this. But I have read many
support questions, some even very recent, from folks building LFS-6.3,
and in a month, BLFS-SVN would not work for them for many of the

And it could turn out frustrating for folks that follow the BLFS
SVN book on top of LFS-6.3 and 100 packages later discover that
there is incompatibility with one or more packages that prevent
him/her from achieving the initial goal.

I do not want to get into a situation where if someone follows
LFS stable, we need to tell them to pull SVN sources from XYZ
day and render it yourself in order to find a combination of
packages that is compatible with one-another.


rmlscsi: [bogomips 1003.22] [GNU ld version 2.16.1] [gcc (GCC) 4.0.3]
[GNU C Library stable release version 2.3.6] [Linux i686]
04:55:00 up 81 days, 19:43, 1 user, load average: 0.08, 0.22, 0.16

More information about the blfs-dev mailing list