On 06/13/2003 09:35:31 AM Bruce Smith wrote:
>> >> >http://www.linux4geeks.de/
>> >> >
>> >> >Should we ask them if we can get access to their build system?
>This
>> >> >way we could update our base LFS system much more easily, don't
>you
>> >> >think so?
>> >>
>> >> I think it' s a good idea. Building a LFS system takes a lot of
>time
>> >and
>> >> when somebody is talking care if this task.....
>> >> I have only 2 concerns:
>> >> 1) can this system be compiled for other CPUs (e.g. 486) ?
>> >> 2) will it always be clean and small, or will they add X, KDE, et=
c
>?
>> >>
>> >> We don't even need a "real", working distro. That's the benefit
>when
>> >we
>> >> just chroot into it. ;-)
>> >
>> >Can you guys give me more details about how LFS and DL go together?=
>>
>> LFS is only supposed to be a defined compile Platfom for DL.
>> We don't want to get it running with any distro, we want to be able
>to mess
>> up the build system without interfering with the "real" OS.
>> By being based on one defined build system (LFS), it should be fairl=
y
>easy
>> to port DL to another platform (e.g. PPC).
>
>OK, makes sense. That's how I "assumed" it was.
>
>> >I understand that we chroot to a LFS system, used to build DL, but
>how
>> >much of the base LFS system goes into the final DL ISO? Are parts =
of
>> >the LFS system copied over to DL, or is LFS just a tool to build DL=
?
>>
>> We still copy a few parts, but we try to compile almost everything o=
n
>our
>> own.
>> By doing this we asure, that we use the correct version of a program=
.
>> Binutils or GCC are a good example.
>>
>> >And how is the LFS tar image on the DL FTP site created? Is it jus=
t
>> >downloaded from the LFS web site, or custom created by DL developer=
s?
>>
>> I usually create this tarball by hand.
>> Compile everything, strip it, remove man pages and other crap. After=
>that I
>> upload it to the FTP Server.
>
>Would the only advantage of using www.linux4geeks.de be that you no
>longer have to create the LFS tarball by hand? Or is there other
>advantages that I'm not seeing?
>
>(I'm not saying that the single advantage is not enough to justify the=
>move, just trying to understand it more completely)
That's the only advantage I see.
Of course there's one disadvantage: we're dependend on this project the=
n.
If they stop maintaining it, or change their rules, then we have to do =
it
manually again.
On the other hand, creating a new LFS system is only necessary 1-2 time=
s a
year.
Heiko
=
|
