LFS/BLFS

Barius Drubeck barius.drubeck at gmail.com
Tue Feb 13 10:45:32 PST 2007


On Tuesday 13 February 2007 18:02, jignesh gangani wrote:
> Hi,
>       Thanks Henry and Gordon for your suggestions. I also believe
> in "Don't fix that ain't broken".
> But I needed a package manager not for updating but mainly for
> uninstalling.
>
>       I am making my CLFS as I want (obviously). I am trying
> different things. I may or may not like them. eg. I have used
> fluxbox as my Window Manager. But then I decided to test other
> also.
> So next I installed Enlightment.(E16). Now I have no need for
> fluxbox. So to keep my system tidey I wanted to uninstall fluxbox.
> In future ( :) ), there may be times like this when I do not want a
> particular pakcage that I installed just for testing.

Basically *LFS is more about building a system than maintaining it.  
You will find several comments in the mailing lists from editors who 
dismiss the subject of package management with an answer like "I just 
fully rebuild my system every 6 months or so...."  Of course that is 
one valid approach.  It is anyway good practice to keep your data 
separate from the system, and backup your configuration files 
regularly.

Many people still prefer to use some kind of package management, and 
you just gave some good reasons why.  The great thing with *lfs is 
that you are free to do as you like.  It's just that package 
management is beyond the scope of *lfs.


>      Neverthless, I am using paco now and uptil now i am quite
> happy with it.

Then I recommend that you use paco!  
Why change if it's not broken?


>      I also read mails on CLFS's mailing archive. (Believe me, I
> thought I am caught in war or something.) LFS guy should not
> recomend any package manager but atleast suggest a few.
>      Thanks again.

http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/stable/chapter06/pkgmgt.html

That page explains the lfs position on package management.  It also 
describes many different approaches to package management, including 
some interesting approaches which are very different to anything 
implemented by any popular package manager.  And it also does name a 
few pkg managers.

Before you start to look at recommendations for package managers, you 
have to first choose which style of management you want.  And since 
*lfs editors are always rebuilding their systems and don't really use 
package management much, maybe they are not the best people to give 
advice about package managers ;-)

-- 
Barius



More information about the blfs-support mailing list