Note: [X] is "yes, yes I do" while [~] is "depends on the system, but mostly no".
[ ] I am an editor of LFS or one of the related projects [X] I use LFS as my primary Linux system [X] I use LFS on more than one PC (including virtual machines) [~] I deviate a lot from LFS (not counting package updates as deviations) [~] I deviate a lot from BLFS (not counting package updates as deviations) Note: The actual installer I use is one that I cooked up myself and is definitely a work in progress still to date. I use the following package management technique: (X) It's all in my head! ( ) I trust the lists of files in the book ( ) I rebuild everything every three months or less, so there is no need to manage anything! ( ) Installation script tracing with installwatch or checkinstall (~) Installation script tracing with some other tool ( ) Timestamp-based "find" operation ( ) User-based ( ) RPM ( ) DPKG ( ) Simple binary tarballs produced with DESTDIR ( ) Other DESTDIR-based method of producing binary packages ( ) Other Note: These are more features that I come to expect of any package management system, but don't necessarily reflect the features of the one I'm using. I use the following features provided by a package manager: [X] Knowing where each file comes from [X] Clean uninstallation of a package [X] Removal of obsolete files when upgrading to a new version [ ] Ability to upgrade toolchain components (most notably, glibc) painlessly [X] Ability to revert mistakes easily and quickly by installing an old binary package [X] Ability to compile once, deploy on many macines [X] Scripting the build I will ignore the future LFS advice on package management if it [X] Can't be applied on a busy machine where many files are accessed/modified every minute [X] Can't be used to transfer packages to another machine [ ] Interferes with config.site files described in DIY-linux [X] Will clobber configuration files when upgrading package versions [ ] Doesn't explain how to package software beyond BLFS [X] Requires learning another language/syntax besides bash shell syntax [~] Exists at all I hope that's sort of what you were looking for. I don't see the harm of having advice on package management even if I myself would refuse to use it in the long run. Any package management I've ever tried to get accustomed to never 'just works' without a bunch of setup. Advice in this area of system development could prove useful to many people who find the configuration of such a system a surprisingly difficult task. I know I did / still do, so I know I'd read and consider it. Jonathan -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
