BLFS-6.4RC1 or any

Ken Moffat zarniwhoop73 at
Wed Feb 17 14:35:06 PST 2010

On 17 February 2010 18:11, Rod Waldren <rjwaldren at> wrote:
> Another idea is to not worry about versions at all.  Only build test and
> update packages as required to maintain parity with LFS and security
> errata.  It may not be bleeding edge but it would certainly meet the
> educational goal and provide a usable system.  Major updates could still
> be done as it it makes sense to do so, feature-wise, not just because
> the external project made a release.

 Looking at the "security errata", for gnome (and
probably in other places - kde has tended to provide
official backports for kde3, but I've no idea if that
is still true for any of kde4 (and no interest in it)
you have essentially two options:

(a) update to latest stable series - typically,
that means upgrading all the dependencies to
be in the latest stable series - this may break
other related (e.g. gnome in the example) packages
unless they too are updated.

(b) hope a distro such as centos or debian-stable
is using the old version the book is using, and has
an available patch.  I've done this a couple of times
*when a BLFS release seemed likely* but it's not an
enjoyable process and usually leaves me wondering
if the fix does indeed solve the problem - without
a handy exploit, there's a large element of trust and
I've seen a few things where backports looked

After tragedy, and farce, "OMG poneys!"

More information about the blfs-support mailing list