Planning an overall direction for LFS

Jeremy Huntwork jhuntwork at
Fri Feb 29 07:26:43 PST 2008

On Fri, Feb 29, 2008 at 04:20:25PM +0200, George Makrydakis wrote:
> I would have some heavy commenting to do on the origin of what you are 
> proposing here but in anycase, time for this will come and you know it. People 
> who know, know. Those who don't probably did not care enough. Discussion in 
> here about this bears little fruit for the time being.

I really don't care where the ideas came from. If you want to claim them
as your own, be my guest. I certainly don't need any praise. I just want
to see LFS move forward.

So, readers, please go back through this thread and remove all instances
where I said 'my ideas' and please replace with 'ideas that George M.
had and that I apparently knew about but had completely forgotten or
transferred into the subliminal'. To the last of my recollection George
was working on an automation tool that was especially adept at fully
parsing XML. I was unaware that he had ideas about restructuring the
format of LFS and making it more modular and flexible.

Really, it's not important to me. What is important is that LFS grow and
progress. And it's important to me that it be LFS. I did try to create
my own fork of the project at one point. If I had a been a bit more
determined, I may have been successful. But in the end, I realized that
I didn't _want_ to fork. I wanted _LFS_ to be successful. The project
had done a lot for me and I was very fond of it, and I wanted to see its
flaws or limitations worked out.

I have no personal agenda with this, George. I'll even step back and
become again a silent user and observer if it means that conversations
like this will end and LFS can finally grow again.


More information about the lfs-dev mailing list