How can I contribute?

Ken Moffat zarniwhoop73 at googlemail.com
Sun Aug 1 07:46:13 PDT 2010


On 1 August 2010 15:10, Vinay Pawar <vinay.pawar at yahoo.com> wrote:

> I don't think there's a web directory containing blfs-svn snapshot tarballs. There's only one available at any given time. I think having a range of snapshots to choose from would be a good idea, regardless of the BLFS release cycle.
>
> Among libs, servers, utils and apps, a large portion of BLFS depends on Xorg. Both Xorg and/or Mesa expect support from the kernel, especially newly developed drivers that need a new kernel(LFS) and a new xf86-video driver from BLFS.
>
> So, when you spot a new LFS stable release and are done building it, one would expect there to be a reasonably updated BLFS too. The current LFS-6.6 has a good mix of glibc/gcc/kernel/etc but finding a good BLFS isn't always easy.
>
> --

 Isn't the latest BLFS (with either fixes to some of the problems, or
newer versions of some
 packages) always the right place to start ?

 I agree that we have *many* things which need to be updated.  In my
own case, I had to
upgrade Mesa after a bug that locked up my radeon r200 was fixed, and
that meant newer
libdrm, one or two other libs or headers needed to be newer, and I
also moved to the current
ati driver and a newer xorg server  (in the same series).  The
versions of these in the book
seem to work for many people, I was just unlucky in using old
less-interesting hardware.

 BLFS _always_ lags LFS.  Now that we seem to have some agreement
about building against
variously the current LFS release  and recent LFS-svn, we might start
to catch up with some
of the backlog.  But there are many packages in BLFS which few people
are interested in - if
you use these, you are more likely to find problems.

ĸen
-- 
After tragedy, and farce, "OMG poneys!"



More information about the blfs-dev mailing list