Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> I've been looking at LSB and in running a couple of basic checks find that we
> have some missing libraries and programs in LFS/BLFS to get to compliance.
> The
> discussion below is only a start. There may be more needed after I get their
> more comprehensive test suite running.
>
Thanks Bruce for thinking of this. Even though LFS is not a "distro" so
to speak, providing basic support for a distro-like install is always
good and a great educational value to our readers. I certainly think
that we can come up with a way to incorporate LSB concepts into the book
without totally changing the way we do things.
> Although I've installed several programs on top of my base LFS test system,
> the
> program check now gives me:
>
> Couldn't find at
> Couldn't find batch
>
I agree with Bryan K wrt at being installed when cron does just fine.
Why do the distros require the at package to be included in the
standard? This may be a rhetorical question, but I am curious.
> Couldn't find cpio
>
cpio is one of those standard unix utilites. I don't think it is any big
deal to provide it in BLFS. I am also an IBM AIX administrator and AIX
has cpio installed too. It has for years.
> Couldn't find crontab
>
I do the symlink thing in my build scripts for fcron to cron. I have
used cron for so long I did it so I wouldn't have to remember fcrontab
'cause I am lazy. I have never setup the /etc/cron.{hourly, daily,
weekly} directories, so I am not sure how all that might work for full
LSB compliance.
> Couldn't find install_initd
> Couldn't find java
>
Even though Bryan is not a fan of java, I use it a lot for stuff and
since we already have it in BLFS I think we are good here.
> Couldn't find lp
> Couldn't find lpr
>
I can totally see why these are in the LSB and since we provide this as
part of the lprng BLFS package, we are good to go.
> Couldn't find mailx
>
Provided already in BLFS, good to go.
> Couldn't find pax
>
I agree with Bryan on this one. Someone somewhere was on a kick to get
a third archiver. If we add to BLFS, then I think we are good.
> Couldn't find remove_initd
> Couldn't find sendmail
>
I honestly prefer sendmail, but I know lots of people also hate it and
prefer postfix. Doesn't the LSB just want an MTA? Maybe symlink
sendmail if you are a postfix'er?
> Couldn't find time
>
I agree with the group on this. What can't we just use bash's
built-in? Maybe I am missing something here.
> Couldn't find xdg-desktop-icon
> Couldn't find xdg-desktop-menu
> Couldn't find xdg-email
> Couldn't find xdg-icon-resource
> Couldn't find xdg-mime
> Couldn't find xdg-open
> Couldn't find xdg-screensaver
>
I have no commentary on stuff for x. I only use {B}LFS for servers.
> Of course, several of these are in BLFS, but many are not: xdg-utils, pax,
> cpio,
> at, batch, and gnu time jump out as being needed.
>
> Some (install_initd and remove_initd) are not familiar to me at all.
>
As noted by others, this is for the LSB compliant boot scripts. If we
go LSB, this is probably the biggest change to the LFS book I think as
it would require a total update/rewrite of the scripts. I am not afraid
of symlinks either, but managing them for the bootscripts can be a
pain. I actually use this tool (sysv-rc-conf) and instructions on a
base LFS.
# http://sourceforge.net/projects/sysv-rc-conf/
wget -nc -c
http://downloads.sourceforge.net/sysv-rc-conf/sysv-rc-conf-0.98.tar.gz
tar -xf sysv-rc-conf-0.98.tar.gz
cd sysv-rc-conf-0.98
sudo su -
echo "" | cpan YAML
echo "" | cpan Term::ReadKey
echo "" | cpan Curses
echo "" | cpan Curses::UI
echo "" | cpan Test::Pod
ln -sv /etc/rc.d/rcsysinit.d /etc/rc.d/rcS.d
exit
sed -i "s/\/etc\/rc/\/etc\/rc\.d\/rc/" sysv-rc-conf.pl
sed -i "s/\/etc\/init.d/\/etc\/rc.d\/init.d/" sysv-rc-conf.pl
sudo make install
cd ..
rm -rf sysv-rc-conf-0.98/
sudo su -
echo sysv-rc-conf-0.98 >> /etc/installed-software
exit
> We have fcron, but I'm not sure if we need to create a link from fcrontab to
> crontab or if Vixie cron is required.
>
> Should we be installing some of these (e.g. cpio, pax, Gnu time) in LFS?
>
> ---------
> The library requirements are a bit better. Right now I'm only missing:
>
I am not a good library person, so I have no commentary on this piece.
> <...>
>
> ----------
>
> What I want to do is to introduce LSB in the Preface of LFS and then continue
> with more discussion in BLFS "After LFS Configuration Issues". In the
> appropriate packages, add a comment that "This package is needed for LSB
> compliance." I some cases there are definite alternatives. For instance the
> sendmail requirement can be met with any of the MTA packages in BLFS.
>
I really like this approach. I think we can greatly enhance the
educational value of the books with this effort.
> ----------
>
> Comments and discussion are welcome.
>
> -- Bruce
>
Thanks All
James
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
