Matching BLFS with LFS (was: How can I contribute?)

Vinay Pawar vinay.pawar at
Sun Aug 1 09:43:27 PDT 2010

--- On Sun, 8/1/10, Randy McMurchy <randy at> wrote:
> Date: Sunday, August 1, 2010, 8:47 PM
> Vinay Pawar wrote:
> > 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. 
> Your expectations are a bit high. :-)
> There simply is not enough development going on with BLFS
> right
> now to *expect* it to match the current stable LFS.
> However, with
> that said, it is almost *always* best to use the most
> recent
> development BLFS with the most current stable LFS as well
> as the
> current development LFS.
> -- 
> Randy

One refreshingly good thing that happened in the last few releases is that LFS stable is comfortably close to upstream 'stable' releases. 

Unfortunately, BLFS-stable is prehistoric in comparison. 

This is a very tricky situation to be in. One way to mend this could be take any BLFS snapshot between May-July 2010 be mark it stable. Point BLFS-dev to LFS-dev. And hope that all the hundreds of updated BLFS packages, both in and out of the book would confirm to gcc-4.5, either upstream or as patches. 




More information about the blfs-dev mailing list