releases and stuff
thsutton at gmail.com
Mon Nov 15 15:16:17 PST 2004
On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 09:01:07 -0500, Mike Hernandez <sequethin at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 17:47:29 +1100, ryan.oliver at pha.com.au
> <ryan.oliver at pha.com.au> wrote:
> > > Ultimately, because it isn't safe to have devel tools on a system
> > > regardless of whether or not they are mounted or not. Putting all the
> > > devel in /opt is nice and tidy to some extent.
> > I must admit I cannot live without some devel tools on my systems.
> > Safest way is to keep them in an encrypted loopback filesystem for
> > when you do actually need them.
> I was reading in Linux Journal that the encrypted loopback stuff might
> be dropped from the kernel. Seems no one wants to maintain it.
Cryptoloop or the device-mapper crypto target thingymabob? If they
meant cryptoloop, good riddance and I'd be surprised if they were
thinking about dropping the device-mapper support for encryption.
Device-mapper would probably be a bit of overkill on a firewall
system, but it could be useful for servers of various sorts (live
backups, checkpointing, etc) and such systems would be much more
likely to want a full development environment (in my opinion, anyway).
I for one would not like to go without a development environment, but
I also wouldn't use a dedicated server as a development box.
I'm looking forward to getting some time to try the HLFS book out this
summer (southern hemisphere), some of the discussions here make me
think that HLFS will be more interesting than LFS was.
More information about the hlfs-dev