BLFS release (?)

Randy McMurchy randy at
Fri May 9 03:10:42 PDT 2008

Randy McMurchy wrote these words on 05/09/08 05:00 CST:

> 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.

I should also mention that if we were to to with a versionless
BLFS, to avoid the above we would need to take periodic snapshots
and label them to somehow be meaningful.

And if we're going to take a snapshot to be used against a stable
version of LFS, we may as well cut a release. It is a trivial job
to get a release out. It takes me more time writing the introductory
text, announcements and website updates, than it takes to do all
the steps in a versioned release.

What I'm saying is that it is nothing to get a release published,
the biggest part is getting the book in a position to be released,
whether that be a snapshot or official version.

It's a catch-22. Either we go along like we have, and deal with
versions of BLFS that end up being "aged" very quickly, or we go
with the FFmpeg methodology of "use current SVN or be damned".
Meaning if it doesn't work for you, than do what it takes to
make it work. Even if that means updating core LFS packages.


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]
05:02:00 up 81 days, 19:50, 1 user, load average: 0.41, 0.40, 0.25

More information about the blfs-dev mailing list