Q: why are the auto-tools in LFS and not BLFS?
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?
> 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
-- DJ Lucas
More information about the lfs-support