[blfs-dev] Getting close to the 7.8 package freeze

Bruce Dubbs bruce.dubbs at gmail.com
Sun Aug 16 22:08:25 PDT 2015


Ken Moffat wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 08:06:25PM -0500, Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>> Bruce Dubbs wrote:
>>> We are getting pretty close to the package freeze for LFS-7.8.  I am
>>> currently waiting for util-linux-2.27 which should be released very soon.
>>>
>>> Doe anyone know of any other LFS packages that have imminent releases of
>>> new stable packages?
>>
>> Just got a note from the util-linux maintainer and he doesn't anticipate
>> release until Aug 25/26 time frame.  Should we hold the 7.8 package freeze
>> that long?
>>
>> If we do, we may also be able to get in KDE Applications 15.08 which are
>> scheduled right now for Aug 19th.  Plasma 5.4 is also due on Aug 20.
>>
>> On the other hand, if we wait for the latest on everything, we will end up
>> waiting forever.
>>
>> To freeze or not to freeze, that is the question.
>>
>>    -- Bruce
>>
> My current view is that BLFS (on LFS as of a few days ago) is not
> ready for release.  For me, qt-5.5.0 appears to not work adequately
> if built in /usr, and appears to be very fragile when trying to
> build it (see my post from a few minutes ago).  Also, sddm did not
> work reliably (poweroff, reboot, suspend) when I last tested it, i.e.
> it seems to need more daemons but we haven't worked out which.  To
> reiterate on that - I was unable to use startkde (i.e. plasma) with
> kde5 in /opt because there was nowhere to tell sddm how to find
> plasma.  If I ran startkde from runlevel 3 I could, after stopping
> that, telinit 5 and get all of sddm working - until I rebooted, at
> which time I lost poweroff, reboot, suspend.
>
> But last time I looked, the main book did not have plasma, so why
> do you care about a point increase of that ?

I was hoping to add it.

> I shall continue to look at my qt5 issues (I really want to get
> qupzilla built with qt5 again), but at the moment I seem to be going
> two steps forward, three steps back and I have no idea whether I
> will manage to solve any of these issues.
>
> However, I should also add that I've never been particularly keen on
> fixed 6-monthly release dates and I consider that releasing an -rc
> in August/September is not an ideal time for those of us in the
> northern hemisphere.  Reputedly, Americans do not take vacations -
> most other peoples who can afford to use computers do take them.

LOL.  What's a vacation?

> ĸen, who appears to be drifting towards the "it will be ready when
> it's ready" attitude - I must have inhaled something from hyperion
> during the pain of the AmigaOne years (pain as in "trying to get a
> working 2.6 kernel on flakey hardware which turned out to not do
> coherent DMA" - the phrase I quoted was from hyperion when asked
> about OS4).

Setting up for a regular release schedule gives us a goal.  I know you 
recall those days when we did not release a 'stable' blfs at all.  That 
really didn't work out.

LFS is certainly a different process than BLFS.  The number of packages 
in BLFS is about 15 times the number in LFS so the churn is quite a bit 
less.  On top of that, there's really no good way to split up BLFS.  The 
interdependencies are just too great.

On the other hand, I don't get too upset if the schedule slips somewhat.

BTW, Qt5 has been working fine for me using KDE Apps like kdenlive.  I 
do run them in xfce though.  And I don't like display managers, but I'll 
start working on them after the freeze.

   -- Bruce



More information about the blfs-dev mailing list