silly me.... and a static tarball

Michael Jager mjager at
Mon Nov 26 14:48:48 PST 2001

claiming to be Matthias Benkmann, <matthias at> said:

>> BUT.... can't it still be done? can't any version of LFS be built from it?
>> The version numbers in the static built isn't important as long as we've
>> got a good working system to build the new one, or am i mistaken?
>> So if a static build (let's assume a pentium I for the present ;))
>> containing the dir stucture, a directory containing the entire static
>> build, and without any sources, and without the kernel sources in
>> usr/include, is made available, can't you just d/l it once, and then
>> build LFS sstems from it for the forseeable future? It seems to me to
>> be pretty generic, no LFS-version specific files included.
> What exactly do you want to achieve? What's wrong with building chapter 5
> yourself? Every LFSer should have done it at least once. Then he can burn
> it on a CD and reuse it for further builds. I don't see the need to deal
> out chapter 5 tarballs on the Web.
I think what Thinus is trying to say is that ATM, you need to have some
distro of linux already installed on your box so that you can build LFS.
That's fine, unless you are actually installing from scratch, ie on a
machine with nothing on it.

Just a thought: would it be possible to make a boot floppy (which allowed
you to load NIC modules, access CD-ROMs, etc so that Thinus' ``static
tarball'' could be loaded onto the HD in the machine, and then make it
bootable from the HD.

Then, after rebooting, one could download the LFS packages (including source
code and everything) and build their own system.


Unsubscribe: send email to listar at
and put 'unsubscribe lfs-support' in the subject header of the message

More information about the lfs-support mailing list