About LFS

Gerard Beekmans gerard at linuxfromscratch.org
Tue Jul 11 07:26:36 PDT 2000

> Now for the "bugs": In version 2.3.5b, Appendix A, the Automake entry,
> under 'Contents', it says "The Autoconf package contains the aclocal and
> automake programs", that must surely be a typo, right? And under

It is. programs is supposed to be "scripts".

> 'aclocal' it says "Automake includes a number of Autoconf macros which
> can be used in your package; some of them are actually required by
> Automake in certain situations." Isn't the last mention of Automake
> supposed to be Autoconf?

Actually no. Autoconf and automake work closely together.
> I have two suggestion too:
> 1 Could you perhaps mention in the package listing in the appendix which
> packages the current one requires to be installed?

That's a long and very tedious process. The main problem is that it's
not easy to find a number of dependencies. Say you installed the
fileutils package a while ago. The you install something like (I'm just
making this up) vim. Vim requires flex. But flex might require
fileutils, but since fileutils is already installed that dependency
isn't seen quickly.

I am planning on figuring this out, but that will take a while. It means
I'll have to install a package on a clean system, see what it needs,
resolve dependencies and see if package then compiles ok. Then I have to
clear the system and start with the second package. This means I have to
erase /lib /usr/lib /bin /sbin /usr/bin /usr/sbin /usr/share every
single time I want to install some package and I will have to reinstall
the same packages (since certain packages are needed for every program)
over and over again (well I won't remove compiler, glibc and binutils.
Those three are clearly needed for every package).

> 2 I learned the hard way that on one of my computers it's a big deal
> where the kernel image is, and it took some time to get it booting
> (though I've finally conquered it now :). Could you perhaps mention
> about the choice of a boot partition in a future version of LFS? There
> may be more people than me who thinks that it's a good idea to do the
> experimenting on an old 486... ;)

What problems did you experience?

Gerard Beekmans

-*- If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem -*-
Mail archive: http://www.pcrdallas.com/mail-archives/lfs-discuss
IRC access: server: irc.linuxfromscratch.org port: 6667 channel: #LFS
Unsubscribe: email lfs-discuss-request at linuxfromscratch.org and put
"unsubscribe" (without the quotation marks) in the body of the message
(no subject is required)

More information about the lfs-dev mailing list