proposal: new approach

Randy McMurchy randy at
Fri Jul 24 15:44:29 PDT 2009

Randy McMurchy wrote these words on 07/24/09 16:28 CST:
> [snip getting ugly stuff]

Tobias has sent a personal apology via email to me. His apology is
accepted. He made good points in his post. In fact, the BDB rejection
may have been a bit steep by Guy. But let's get past all that.

BLFS is indeed way behind. I suggest we just update to the newest
releases of packages and see what breaks. I can't promise I can help
build many packages, but I will review commits.

If updating BDB breaks OpenLDAP, then we'll address it then. If XYZ
breaks ABC, we'll address it then. Otherwise, development will be
stifled. That is that last thing we need right now. We need package
updates. Lots of them. It's been my experience that there is a
certain path one must go in building BLFS. This path has usually
been effective in discovering breakage.

Anyway, my recommendation is to just jump in and update as many
packages to the latest and greatest as possible. We'll address
breakage as we discover it. Does anyone disagree with this policy?

When you think about it, what do we really have to lose? It's not
like BLFS (even the dev book) is stable and ready to be used with

Update, update, update. Let's everyone get on the ball. Send in
patches and recommendations. Keep the flow of information coming.


rmlscsi: [bogomips 1003.25] [GNU ld version 2.16.1] [gcc (GCC) 4.0.3]
[GNU C Library stable release version 2.3.6] [Linux i686]
17:36:00 up 18 days, 6:04, 1 user, load average: 0.00, 0.03, 0.02

More information about the blfs-dev mailing list