Chapter 6 Coreutils installation

TheOldFellow theoldfellow at
Sun Oct 12 13:33:12 PDT 2008

On Sun, 12 Oct 2008 13:48:13 -0400
Jeremy Huntwork <jhuntwork at> wrote:

> Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> > I'm a bit hazy on this and don't want to take to time to try to dig through the 
> > archives.  However, I think Robert is right.  At the time we just wanted to 
> > promote the tools that are used a lot.  I don't think there are any technical 
> > issues that would prevent using the Chapter 5 versions of coreutils or sed 
> > between coreutils and diffutils.
> No, it's as Dan says. It's all about hard-coded instances of tools that 
> coreutils provides winding up in installed packages. While I agree that 
> it may actually be something that should be worked out in the packages 
> that do the hard-coding, by having those core packages installed early, 
> we avoid the issue entirely in whatever package may decide to do it.
> As was heavily discussed around the time we did the re-ordering, there's 
> no technical advantage to building packages in alphabetical order, so 
> that should not be a high priority. What _is_ important is knowing which 
> packages should be built first and why. And anything that doesn't 
> require any special placement can just be done whenever, so for them it 
> becomes useful to place them in alphabetical order just so that the book 
> is organized and flows logically (and so an editor knows where to place 
> any new additions).
> --
> JH

This is probably not that important, but if there are no 'prior'
dependencies in a number of packages, the you could exploit parallelism
in the build to speed it up.  Not that I do it, nor know anyone who


More information about the lfs-dev mailing list