On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 09:38:11AM -0300, Fernando de Oliveira wrote: > Em 28-04-2014 13:37, Pierre Labastie escreveu: > different. > > > For now, I'll finish updating BLFS's gcc to 4.9.0, then build today's or > > tomorrow's version of LFS, and test that the current BLFS book builds (using > > automation as much as possible). > > I use automation for LFS, never for BLFS, unfortunately. > > I think that you, Bruce, Ken and I will be using each on a different > LFS-svn. >
If it matters, I'm intending to use whatever is the then-current LFS for all of the following - sysvinit without systemd [ My systemd build started out as sysvinit, then got converted. In the future I'll make them separate things in my scripts ], systemd, eudev [ now at 1.6, looks as if the fhandle requirement will be in the _next_ release ]. Both the sysvinit [ i.e. udev from systemd ] and systemd versions will be throw-away systems, and one might overwrite the other. Probably, all three will use a different version of LFS-svn. For these, I need to check the changes in my scripts to separate "sysvinit" from systemd, and to update packages in BLFS. So far, the two gnome applications I use (gucharmap, evince) are stuck at 3.10. And I need to work out where I am going with cups (still on 1.7.1, to avoid avahi), and to test things on x86_64 with gcc-4.9.0. I guess that is going to take most of the time I am able to commit to BLFS, so my edits will probably be few. > The reason for this reply is to say that you are correct. Next time of a > big LFS change, we all could agree on which svn version to use. I don't > remember what was done, before LFS-7.0 release. In the first couple of months after 6.8, I think we had a toolchain change (probably gcc, but I don't remember) which impacted a few BLFS packages. ISTR Andy was active in using sed to fix the breakages as they came to light. Then I dropped out - doing other things, then I went on a couple of long holidays. Throughout that time, I watched what was happening on the lists and didn't think there was anything to worry about. Until I first tried to boot 7.0 ;-) Summary - ALL changes will hurt _somebody_, and even if we all build on the same version someone will still get hurt sooner or later. I still prefer the idea of separate branches to trial changes, but svn is not branch-friendly IMHO - despite what Bruce thinks - and I'm not prepared to devote the time to maintaining an eudev branch, so I'll have to work with whatever Bruce is doing. As he said, we are months away from a release. Providing we don't lose all our testers, no doubt everything will be for the best, in the best of all possible worlds.[¹] ĸen 1. "Candide, ou l'optimisme" - Voltaire. Bruce always says I'm too pessimistic ;-) -- 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
