LFS in a rut?

TheOldFellow theoldfellow at gmail.com
Mon Jun 13 13:43:28 PDT 2005


Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
> Hey Everyone,
> 
> I was just reviewing some of the pages on the current website, and
> sadly, much of it is outdated. I came across this page, which I don't
> recall ever reading before, and I got a bit of a chuckle out of it:
> 
> http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/organization.html
> 
> This (and what follows) especially caught my eye, "In the third quarter
> of 2003, various community members identified problem symptoms in the
> "Linux From Scratch" project. The symptoms included lack of recent
> substantial progress, text and commands "out of sync" for an extended
> period, loss of enthusiasm by project members, loss of personnel
> resources, end-user involvement reduced, some user code/text
> contributions lost, apparent lack of planning, uncertainty as to what
> the project product is."
> 
> Especially after editing up a new acknowledgements page (and seeing the
> few names that are left associated with LFS) it feels like we might be
> right back there again.
> 
> Any opinions on this?

This isn't a well thought out response, but just wild firing of the old
neurons:

Perhaps there is no one with the drive that Gerard once had to move it
forward?  No - that's not it.  I see Jim and Jeremy and Matt making
edits in the various books - especially the Cross-LFS book, and Manuel
making HUGE strides in the XML markup.

I think the problem is that we have not RELEASED anything.  We are too
cautious - release and be damned! (or at least be flooded with support
issues).  I think that if Gerard were still alive there might be some
more movement on that, but it's hard to do it by concensus - it needs a
dictator.  I never knew any software project that worked without a
strong hand at the helm.  We need a Release Manager - do it like GCC.

I know we want BLFS synced up, but it would be better IMO to let it
catch up, rather than let LFS die a lingering death.  Even my gcc-4
build built BLFS OK (yes - I had to research some patches, but hey,
that's the fun of it).

The real problem might be that Linux is now a stable system, easy to
build and get it right. Many of the old problems making odd Berkeley and
SysV GNU clones work together on Linus's kernel have been sorted.  But,
on the other hand that might just be my viewpoint....

I'm looking forward to see what other views emerge on this.

R.



More information about the lfs-dev mailing list