Wiki Development Festival
jan.dvorak at sitronicsts.com
Mon Oct 20 00:15:28 PDT 2008
On Sunday 19 October 2008 15:56:57 Petr Cerny wrote:
> You mean like checking, that the patch has a short short comment header
> and whether the patch applies (more or less, but preferably more)
> flawlessly to the source?
> Do I get it right, that the basic idea is having heavily commented
> scripts from which the Book can be generated?
> For paging through the
> script, it might be nice to have something generate ANSI coloured
> version (modified rules for enscript would be an option).
> As for gpm and web browser: you usually build LFS from a comfortable
> distro. Once you reboot, it's perfectly fine to chroot to the original
> distro on a number of VTs, so you have both the environment where you
> build without depending on the old installation and a fully-fledge
> system for anything else during the lengthy compilations (you can even
> chroot back into the the booted root, so you can create the HLFS almost
> completely from X).
Well, theoretically. But the systems may differ enough for the host not to
run on new kernel or without properly executed rc sequence. I usually had
problems with SuSE. Debian and it's clones are, however, much more usable
> Considering the nature of HLFS (that is having a secure system), it
> seems to make more sense having someone to review all patches before
> applying them to the tree, not just let anyone to apply a fix - no
> matter how trivial it may seem.
I've put it wrong. Changes from unauthorized people would always get
reviewed before applying.
More information about the hlfs-dev