[lfs-support] Best Linux Version for LFS?

Bruce Dubbs bruce.dubbs at gmail.com
Wed Oct 10 09:33:31 PDT 2012


Feuerbacher, Alan wrote:
> Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>
>>> Currently I have Windows7 installed on a 180G SSD, as well as
>>> several 1-3TB hard drives.
>>
>> A waste of HW.
>
> Why? I use one big drive for audio and video stuff, another for
> general backups, and want yet another to put the Linuxes on. The
> separate one for Linux is for convenience if I want to remove all of
> it easily. Am I not seeing something?
>
> And I'm enough pissed off at Windows7 right now that I'm seriously
> thinking of getting rid of it and sticking with some version of
> Linux.

I was referring to Windows.

>> Compared to what you have, LFS/BLFS takes very few resources.  Just
>> a few partitions: . . . Of course most of this could be combined
>> into one or perhaps two partitions, but separating things out is
>> useful for testing multiple builds.
>
> That's kind of what I thought.
>
> I'd like to try out Debian, Ubuntu and Linux Mint as a start, and
> perhaps others as I gain experience. Does it matter which of these I
> end up with for LFS purposes? Is one more friendly to LFS than
> others?

Not really.  You just need to be able to satisfy the Host System 
Requirements in Section iii of the Preface.

My experience with Ubuntu is mixed.  The earlier versions, 8.04, etc 
were OK, but the latest ones with Unity were slow and had too much eye 
candy.  I've not looked at any recently.

   -- Bruce





More information about the lfs-support mailing list