Q: why are the auto-tools in LFS and not BLFS?

DJ Lucas dj at linuxfromscratch.org
Fri Feb 27 16:35:06 PST 2009

Jeremy Henty wrote:
> I'd always taken it for  granted that m4, autoconf, automake etc.  had
> to be  in LFS, but  recently I thought  "Hang on!  The  auto-tools are
> *development* tools,  not build tools.   Building auto-tooled software
> only requires  a shell,  make, sed etc.   You don't need  autoconf and
> friends unless you want to develop software.".
> So,  since creating  an  LFS system  only  requires building  existing
> software, why does it include  the auto-tools?  Could we not move them
> to BLFS?  What am I missing here?
> Regards,
> Jeremy Henty

Define development.  We patch the source, so IMO we are doing 
'development' to some extent.  If you make changes in the build (by 
modifying auto-tools scripts), then the auto-tools are required to 
regenerate the configure script and makefiles.  Although I don't believe 
that there are any such changes in current LFS, there have been many in 
the past.

-- DJ Lucas

More information about the lfs-support mailing list