LiveCD or No LiveCD?
bruce.dubbs at gmail.com
Mon Feb 25 08:02:55 PST 2008
Jeremy Huntwork wrote:
> Hello Everyone,
> It has recently been suggested to me that the LFS LiveCD project be
> killed. The main arguments for this are, essentially:
> 1) It is currently unmaintained
> 2) It removes the essential prerequisite of being able to configure a
> Linux system
> 3) It leads to less testing from other hosts
> 4) A seeming lack of community interest in contributing. Especially,
> essential testing (and reports on the results of tests!) on varied
> hardware does not seem to be taking place
> As you may guess, I have mixed feelings about this. But after reflecting
> on it a bit, my hesitancy to agree comes mostly from personal attachment
> to the CD and perhaps not what is best for LFS.
> At this point I need community input. I realize that many of you may use
> and appreciate the CD, just as I do. But realistically, this project
> will die of its own if it does not get some help. And if that happens,
> then LFS would be better off removing the dead weight.
> I have some energy and some ideas to put back into the project, but only
> if I get some help with development and testing. I need to know two things:
> * Does the community still want the LiveCD project? (Consider that a
> couple of the arguments above imply that the LFS LiveCD by its nature is
> degrading the quality of LFS)
> * If so, is the community prepared to lend help in keeping it alive?
> If the answer to both questions is not a solid yes, I'm afraid that
> we'll have no choice but to kill the project.
I think we should just leave the project as quiescent, not kill it. A
live CD is useful, but it doesn't have to be completely current. Just
leave it alone for now and we can look into updating it when a change
makes it necessary. For someone to use it, with a more current version
of LFS, they will just need to download the sources separately.
More information about the lfs-dev