How can I contribute?

Vinay Pawar vinay.pawar at
Sat Jul 31 22:58:48 PDT 2010

--- On Sat, 7/31/10, Randy McMurchy <randy at> wrote:
> That should probably change now. I'm not sure any active
> developers
> are using 6.5. I am open to suggestions, but I feel BLFS
> may need
> to just simply target the LFS Development book. Anybody who
> could
> contribute some alternate ideas would certainly be
> helpful.

I'm using a LFS-6.6 with BLFS-svn-20100527 and intend on sticking to LFS-6.6 until there's a kernel and/or gcc requirement. Also, I need to upgrade BLFS to a June/July snapshot. 

I think if BLFS svn monthly snapshots are archived, it'll be easier for BLFS users to mark them stable for their purposes. I have a whole bunch of blfs snapshots and have kinda lost track of which is which. I don't remember ever using a BLFS stable. I agree that blfs-dev should target lfs-dev, but at the same time dramatic changes like gcc-4.5 could easily create a patch mess for those who can't switch to gcc-4.5 yet, but need blfs-dev for the most part. Also I think the note on the blfs download page about a release being delayed isn't true anymore. BLFS completely missed a release. 



More information about the blfs-dev mailing list