[blfs-dev] Upcoming BLFS-7.5 release

Fernando de Oliveira famobr at yahoo.com.br
Mon Mar 3 03:48:15 PST 2014

Em 02-03-2014 21:42, Ken Moffat escreveu:
> On Sun, Mar 02, 2014 at 05:16:44PM -0600, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>> We just released LFS-7.5 and we need to look at releasing BLFS-7.5 in 
>> the next few days.  AFAIK, all the 7.5 tickets are complete and all the 
>> packages tagged for 7.5.   It is just a matter of doing the release, but 
>> I'm sure that there are some tweaks that are necessary.
>> For planning purposes, I think we can target Wednesday. March 5.
>> Comments?
>  The --libexecdir switches still look a bit iffy to me.
> 1. The following use --libexecdir with what I think are adequate
> explanations of why: vte2, acl, dhcpcd.  Anyone who disagrees :
> please speak up!
> 2. The following explain an optional --libexecdir switch: gnupg2,
> emacs, librep, geoclue.  I don't have a problem with leaving this
> sort of thing in for a transitional period while people may still be
> using older versions of LFS (does 3 years sound about right?), BUT
> (i.) the markup is '<parameter>', I think it hould be '<option>' ?
> (ii.) should we also do this for all other existing BLFS packages
> which now use /usr/libexec ?
> 3. Subversion used to run a subshell to interrogate apxs.  The
> current page looks unusual, but I haven't any desire to build it for
> 7.5 (I only rebuilt my server in September), so I have to assume it
> is ok ?

More or less. I am comparing the two versions in BLFS svn and 7.4 (It is
very good to having releases, so to easily comparing instructions
versions. In "Command Explanations", of svn (7.5-rc1) I think we should
write the complete switch, or it is almost useless:

s|=...|=$(/usr/bin/apxs -q libexecdir)|

In configure, I don't know how to handle the switch alone

> 4. The following are still doing things the old way:
> menu-cache, qemu, openbox, mc, pulseaudio.  Is there any reason why
> these should NOT drop --libexecdir ?

menu-cache and openbox are my faults. I can fix them.

The difference between my opinions and nothing are as small as the
majority here wants. But I did not pay attention to this libexec drop
subject at the beginning and it bothered a lot, during tags. So, I would
like to propose that these kind of things should never be left for the
tfreeze/tag stage, but be done before or after, in the future. Just
tagging is hard enough a work.


More information about the blfs-dev mailing list