1 Aug 2010 04:19
Re: Who uses package users?
Drew Ames <jxa127 <at> verizon.net>
2010-08-01 02:19:01 GMT
2010-08-01 02:19:01 GMT
Dan McGhee wrote: > Drew, I'm in the same boat as you. I'm grateful that Bruce will allow us > to use it, but I really don't think it's the appropriate venue for > something like a blog. The discussions that you, Tim and I are having > really look more like that than developing a specific structure for > others to use. I know that some of the things on the wiki right now are > "user notes," with definite recommendations for switches and honing the > installation of a particular package. Other than the hint as it > currently exists, I don't think we have anything similar to what I just > described. Maybe we do, but this is beyond my expertise. Still, users' notes are very helpful. > > I've been watching the various posts today and was waiting until > tomorrow to write anything of my own. Domestic project. :) I think that > you, Tim and I, at least, need to have a plan, put something useable in > place and then fine tune it. If I'm not mistaken, that's the function of > trac. Okay, here's a suggestion of, at least, how I think I can contribute: I will post notes on the packages as I build them/run into trouble. This is going to take me a while given my other family (wife and two boys aged 4 and 7 months), but I can persevere. As I run into trouble on a package (like glibc) I'll post what's going on and document how I (with help from this group) solve it. > > I'll give you a good example. There's Tim's concept of making install > directories by using the script. He's used it "ad hoc," as he says, and > I've never used it. Right now I'm about 25% through my manual rebuild of > Ch. 5, and I won't be able to test the concept until I get to Ch. 6. > Soooooo, on the topic of automated install directories, we don't have > anything but ideas to offer yet. True. If we document our builds, though, perhaps we can create that updated list of install directories as we go. > > I don't think that trac authorization is something that we need "right > now." I also think that when we're ready, Bruce may still be amenable to > letting us use it. Agreed. I like the idea of a wiki, but I hadn't thought of barging in on the LFS wiki just yet. Maybe after we've started generating some content? > > In the meantime, let's just keep up the exchange about what we're doing. > At the risk of sounding insulting, and I sure don't mean to be, you > still, as yet, must complete a successful LFS build using the package > users system. Your notes will be invaluable. Hah! No offense taken at all! I haven't even built LFS _without_ package users, although I've successfully built the toolchain twice. I've been using Linux for five or so years now. Maybe a little more. I started with Knoppix, getting my feet wet with a live CD and then moved to Ubuntu 5.04. I moved somewhat quickly to Slackware 11 when it came out and have stayed with Slackware ever since. So I'm an LFS newbie, but pretty experienced with Linux in general. Making packages is a topic that's somewhat dear to me. I'm one of the contributors to src2pkg (http://www.src2pkg.net/) a package-making utility for Slackware. I've also been diving into making .deb and .rmp packages a bit -- mostly to help get src2pkg working with those formats. For all of that, the package users scheme seems exceptionally elegant and worth pursuing. Anyway, I'm in the process of making a second LFS disk image I may try to simply build LFS without package users first and then come back and do it with package users. Right now I've got a good toolchain backed up, so I can start over with both versions at the beginning of chapter 6. I _love_ virtual machines! Warm regards, -Drew