On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 05:13:58PM +0200, Pierre Labastie wrote: > What I meant is not that I wanted to keep BLFS-SVN compatible with previous > versions of LFS, but rather that we agree about which version of LFS we use > for updating.
I don't have a problem with frenando's commit, because it adds an explanation for the switch, and that should prompt people if/when things go wrong. However, I *do* think that we should try to keep BLFS-svn compatible with at least the current LFS release. Yes, there is a 7.5 BLFS book. ISTR it contains a version of openssl with the heartbeat vulnerability. Until the arrival of systemd in LFS, there was little problem - things like the latest readline brought seds or patches, usually without breaking older LFS hosts. It starts to look as if my ability to recommend BLFS users should use the -dev book will vanish unless they also use LFS-svn. And only a couple of weeks ago, LFS-svn was definitely only for the more experienced builder. I see little enthusiasm for systemd among current BLFS editors. The ability to have both init methods in LFS is certainly educational, but it seems to make BLFS pay a very high price. ĸen -- das eine Mal als Tragödie, dieses Mal als Farce -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
