marty marty at goodoldmarty.com
Fri Mar 7 00:37:52 PST 2008

Hash: SHA1

> The LFS project has been very generous in hosting this project, and I have 
> always believed it is worthwhile, but the scope of this project is quite 
> broad and some definitions should be set. Goals for 2.0 and 1.0 should 
> probably be set at the same time, to help contain the scope of 1.0. I would 
> like 1.0 to be as broad as possible, such as featuring more than the 
> toolchain. 

Security is the primary goal.
Actually, the toolchain is the only real difference between LFS and HLFS.
That however, also means everything is very different in the end.

As a security conscious project, there are important things missing.
What about network/Internet security? Netfilter is ready to rock in the kernel,
but HLFS ignores this essential security. Add IPtables and a basic config.
SSH is also essential in most cases. Pam is needed by lots of server apps but
this goes unmentioned forcing a rebuild of shadow, blah blah.
And useradd has never worked right for me so it probably needs attention.
Yes, by all means; if it relates to security I encourage expansion, but the tool
chain is what I really care about. Thanks Robert. You are the best!

Marty B

- --
Putting Microsoft in a computer is like putting screen doors in a submarine.
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)


More information about the hlfs-dev mailing list