[lfs-dev] [blfs-dev] Thinking about a new LFS Live CD/iso

dueffert at uwe-dueffert.de dueffert at uwe-dueffert.de
Mon Apr 18 16:39:41 PDT 2016

On Mon, 18 Apr 2016, Bruce Dubbs wrote:

> dueffert at uwe-dueffert.de wrote:
>> if uncluding mc, then its dependencies - at least glib and libffi.
>> libssh2 has been handy here too (for virtual sftp file system support),
>> though I recognize it is not even in the book :-(
> Yes, of course the dependent libraries must be included.  I was just listing 
> end user utilities.
Thought so. Nevertheless mentioned it after checking my scripts because 
libssh2 (yes, I know, still not mentioned in the book) was one of the few 
differences between our ideas of a useful starting point system. If using 
mc at all, being able to directly compare or copy between an incomplete 
local and a known-to-be-good remote system is a nice bonus.

>> if not including any graphics library, what's the advantage of links over
>> lynx? Just personal preference?
> For the little I use them, they are equivalent.  Is there a reason to prefer 
> one over the other?
Little. lynx is supposed to be easier/faster to navigate and configure 
(and was there first) while links is trying to be closer to graphical 
browsers by e.g. supporting image file formats. Not sure how good this 
approach works without graphics libraries. If I really need graphics I use 
a graphical browser, otherwise I'm fine with lynx.


More information about the lfs-dev mailing list