Re: SLFS book chapter proposals

Archaic <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.linux.lfs.security
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On Mon, Dec 22, 2003 at 03:14:46AM +0200, Christos Gioran wrote:
> 
<..>
> Hope this clarifies my sayings to this point. Apologies for any
> inconsistencies.

It does. :)

> The point not clarified (at least IMO) as of yet is whether we will mention 
> only differences from the LFS book or list *all* compilation commands. My 
> proposal is that after deciding on the contents of the book, we will have a 
> clear idea of the extent of differences. If it is tolerable then document the 
> differences only. Otherwise (most probably) we will have to include all 
> instructions from the beginning.

It would seem to me that if package X is done differently, give the
entire build commands to build it. If it isn't done differently, but
rather is just rebuilt with the hardened toolchain, then reference LFS.
No need trying to keep in sync the same instructions as LFS. That could
prove to be a hassle.

-- 
Archaic

Every election is a sort of advance auction sale of stolen goods.

- H.L. Mencken

-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-security
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.