proposal: new approach

Eujon Sellers eujon at
Fri Jul 24 16:58:18 PDT 2009

On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 4:44 PM, Randy McMurchy
<randy at> wrote:
> 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.

So as a total newbie to BLFS development, what would the best course
of action be? Just get a recent LFS system running and start building
the latest and greatest packages from the BLFS book (the base
libraries were mentioned as a good starting point)? I've got some
spare time I could commit to building packages but I'm unsure of what
the proper testing procedures are. At this point are we worried about
just the package itself building and not so much the repercussions of
other packages that depend on it?


More information about the blfs-dev mailing list