replaceable-handling (was: question to postfix instructions (long))
larry at linuxfromscratch.org
Thu Mar 25 13:34:46 PST 2004
"Reinhard" <bookreader at gmx.com> wrote in message
news:200403250845.02667.bookreader at gmx.com...
> > One question about dependencies.
> > I have the glimpse, the (some) editors don't like to have the
> > dependencies meet the installation instructions.
> > How about to add the (unwanted) dependencies in an entity-section, so
> > information is there (in the book), but does not get rendered to the
> > HTML-variant.
> > Could that be a compromise?
> Are we talking about dependencies outside the BLFS universe?
Not only. The references from the book which point to the 'nowhere' outside
BLFS, are perfectly OK.
Staying on your example OpenSSL - I remember, there was an dependency to
Kerberos. The dependency-walker stated that as
"Kerberos is not part of the book."
For me, it's good enough. You know, there's a dependency to outside and you
have to do that on your own.
If I remember well, I had some troubles building heimdal, so I understand
that package is not part of the book.
> If I put a dependency in the book, I have to believe it is usable by my
> 'average user', so testing is an issue here.
>Well, I don't think, I meet the 'average user'.
>Right after finishing lfs, I wanted to install ssh[d], wget, nfs(client)
>mc - so that I could work on my distro-box connected to the lfs-box.
>Then I thought, start with a little step and for so start building the
>server (without x).
>Some packages failed to build, cause the dependencies where not mentioned
>the status of the dependencies was mentioned 'Optional', where the
>failed without that package.
>That was quite anoying.
openssh requires openssl, ok
wget will compile without openssl, ok
mc will compile with glib, ok
nfs-client, can't confirm but from other experiences nfs-client requires
portmap require tcp-wrappers seems reasonable. I can also see this as a
tricky install, for example, does portmap need to be installed or need to be
installed and running.
Another problem I see is that your mc won't work like it did in the
distribution until all the optional packages are installed. As you
discovered, there is this cliff you go off of between minimal and fully
functional, at which time you are installing all kinds of libraries, like x,
without improving functionality until they are all installed and programs
recompiled to use them.
>The other point was, after 10 (or more) times writing
>usr && make && make install", I missed one time the --prefix.
>S..t - how to recover?
>I didn't know, so I started again after chapter 5 with a clean device.
This is a good example of what blfs-support can do for you.
>May be, I was to dump to meet your 'average user'.
>But I'm quite sure, no one would install all packages of blfs.
>Further I believe, the book is a tool to mature with.
>But it won't be, if you only get frustrated with your first steps.
Agreed, although you will learn more by pushing through the frustration than
by smooth sailing, but it is not the books intent to frustrate the user.
>I would like to have the dependencies meet the install-instructions from
>book. This leads to the following meaning of qualifier:
>- when the build-process (with the build-instructions from the book) fails
>absence of that package.
>- when the build gets enriched by the presence of that package (no matter,
>whether configure gets rid of the presence of the package, or whether it
>needs an additional switch)
>- (YES, I like this qualifier) is like "Optional", but reflects a
>recommendation of the [B]LFS-team. Like the usage of vim in the LFS (I like
>vim, but I know, many others don't) it's a recommendation. From the mailing
>lists, I suppose, that gnome could be also a recommendation, ...
>Using dependency-trackers, the user could choose, whether to prefer a
>installation (Recommended is treaten Optional), or whether he likes to do a
>recommended installation (Recommended is treaten Required).
I going to refer you to the archives for this discussion in blfs-dev on
this. It was discussed at length and I don't want to open it up again at
>Well, my dream of a dependency-tracker is, if for example you just finished
>with lfs and step to blfs seeing that bunch of packages and you don't have
>idea of what you need, so if you decide, you like to install 'OpenOffice'
>start a dependency-tracker, that will tell you, what packages you have to
>install first = means: what chapters you have to look at.
>For me, blfs is a big universe, unmanageable without tools or experience.
>So the first thing to need is a path through the chapters (but please only
>those chapters, I like/need to install) - so a dependency-tracker is
>Such a tool is only that good, as the dependencies in the book.
>Therefor I'm so annoying on that item.
>I appreciate [BA]LFS a lot and I like your utopia.
>I believe, that an dependency-tracker makes to book more attractive and
>decrease the number of support-mails.
Our general advice is to pick the 'function' of the system and work
backwards, granted it is much easier for a "web server", than a "desktop
More information about the blfs-dev