basic philosophy (not a flame, just curious)

brendan strejcek brendan at cs.uchicago.edu
Wed Sep 6 13:31:12 PDT 2000


hello alfs people,

why is the alfs engine installing from source? this seems
sort of wastefull. especially if a user has a profile that
they want to install on multiple machines. it seems to make
sense to compile once, and then have some tool build a
custom dist from that single lfs install.

it seems like the perfect tool (to me) would be a bootable
cd which contained the bare minimum of a devel environment
(gcc, make, sed, awk, sh-utils, ... ) and source packages,
so the user would not have to use a pre-made distro to
bootstrap into the new lfs system (this arrangement always
seemed sort of unclean to me) (is a cd like this already
available?) (does anyone know what it takes to create such
a bootable cd with a live filesystem and everything? would
lilo be used? the word el-torito comes to mind ... ) (even
better, has anyone created a bootable powerpc cd? now i'm
getting off topic)

i am certainly not saying that anything should be distributed
as binaries between the user and the rest of the world, but
it alost seems to me like a separation of installation and
build is nicer. 

maybe what i am suggesting is another tool that could be used
after alfs has done its work on a single build ... or would
this just amount to a glorified disk copy?

one last point - if writing and debugging the xml directives
for the alfs install is as much work as installing by hand, why
not just install by hand? and if you are just going to have some
"well-tested" config files, how is this any different than
just downloading debian (save that it takes longer because you
are compiling everything) ?

thoughts?

brendan





More information about the alfs-discuss mailing list