[lfs-dev] More inconsistencies in LFS-8.1 Systemd

Richard Melville 6tricky9 at gmail.com
Mon Sep 11 03:43:20 PDT 2017

On 11 September 2017 at 10:23, Pierre Labastie <pierre.labastie at neuf.fr>

> On 11/09/2017 10:12, Richard Melville wrote:
> On 9 September 2017 at 16:48, Roger Koehler <roger.o.koehler at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> On Sat, Sep 9, 2017 at 9:43 AM, Bruce Dubbs <bruce.dubbs at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Richard Melville wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On the web page
>> >>
>> >> http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/stable-systemd/chap
>> ter01/whatsnew.html
>> >> there are further inconsistencies.  The following packages: d-bus,
>> expat,
>> >> gperf, and tcl-core all have a hyphen between the package name and the
>> >> version, e.g. "Expat-2.2.3", as one would expect.  None of the other
>> >> packages listed does, e.g. "File 5.31".  It may appear to some to be an
>> >> unimportant issue, but it looks sloppy.
>> >
>> > Seems a little picky, but nevertheless I've updated my sandbox to add
>> dashes
>> > to all the packages.  We will not update the stable book, but the dashes
>> > will appear in the -dev book starting with the next commit.
> Thanks Bruce, I think that's a big improvement.
>> Consistency is good.
>> I like the dashes because when I build manually following the book, I
>> like to copy and paste the package name to use as the filename of my
>> log file. It would be nice to not have to add the dashes manually
>> (easier to work with than spaces in filenames).
> As Roger says, "consistency is good", so, at the risk of appearing to
> increase your workload further Bruce, could I again return to the point
> that this web page: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/news.html has
> recently diverted from the long-running standard of, for example, "LFS 7.9
> Stable Release to one of "LFS Stable Version 7.10 Release".  The original
> standard reads so much better than the recently adopted change.  Surely it
> is better to keep the version number adjacent to "LFS" than it is to
> shuffle it close to the end of the line.
> Here's another apparently random change.  The Development LFS Systemd
> book:  http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/systemd/
> chapter06/dbus.html shows "D-Bus-1.10.22",
> whereas the latest BLFS book http://www.linuxfromscratch.
> org/blfs/view/svn/general/dbus.html shows "dbus-1.10.22".  Personally, I
> prefer the latter style of lower case as it's consistent with the package
> download URL of  http://dbus.freedesktop.org/releases/dbus/dbus-1.10.22.
> tar.gz.  However, my point is that there is no consistency.  These may
> seem like very minor points, but surely, in computing consistency is very
> important.
> Normally, all our titles should use "Title Case". Now the question is what
> package names are. For example, SWIG is an acronym (for Simplified Wrapper
> and Interface Generator), so should be written all caps. So is GCC (Gnu
> Compiler Collection). But what about NASM (Netwide Assembler) or yasm, for
> example? We usually rely on upstream way of writing. So we have NASM, and
> yasm (but it should be Yasm in titles and at the beginning of a sentence).
> Upstream way of writing dbus is D-Bus. But users (at least me, but I guess
> others too) looking for it in the table of contents, do not know upstream
> way, and look for dbus. They won't find it, even if case matching is
> relaxed...
> Yes, that is a problem.

> So, yes, consistency is good, but consistency in natural language is not
> always possible. And the books are natural language, not programming
> language. I can tell you as one of the developer of jhalfs ;-)

Agreed, and you have my sympathy.

> Anyway, what should we do in this case:
> - at least LFS and BLFS should be consistent. So the titles should be the
> same for the same package in both books.
> - If we take our convention of Title Case, and want to have an easily
> searchable title, this should be Dbus
> - If we prefer upstream usage, this should be D-Bus

Yes, that is a dilemma.

> FWIW, D-Bus was changed to dbus in BLFS on November 27th, 2016, by Bruce...

Thanks for highlighting all the issues Pierre, and the complexities
involved; I realise that you have a difficult job.  My main problem is that
nobody seems to want to discuss the change in format on
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/news.html which seems fairly

Thanks again.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/pipermail/lfs-dev/attachments/20170911/23cfb1cb/attachment.html>

More information about the lfs-dev mailing list