ALFS Status: Past and future [was Re: new guy, newbie questions.]

Rob Landley landley at
Tue Jan 22 15:56:14 PST 2002

On Tuesday 22 January 2002 12:45 am, Jesse Tie-Ten-Quee wrote:

> > I think this should be the second step of ALFS, to be a "command
> > propagation system" so that at some kind having a good ALFS profile will
> > give you good ideas about how to install stuff.
> Oh sure, if the syntax is good enough.. and one understands what the
> syntax does, you should be able to just read it and instantly understand
> what the profile is trying todo.
> But in reality, we are *automating* the LFS process, so alot of the
> "educating the user" process gets removed.

Yes and no.

The "educating the user" becomes "see it work, then look at the code".

Which is what most LFS users are expecting when they install a package from 
source anyway.  If they can't get it to work, the code isn't so useful.  If 
they can get it to work, they can trace through the code, insert breakpoints 
and print statements, see what actually wound up on disk at the end of a run, 
run it again with modifications...

ALFS could theoretically be the most open and accessable system installer 
there is.  No english description can replace compilable source code, and the 
linux from scratch book is not quite the same as a working XML based 
from-source package installer.

If you're REALLY successful, source tarballs might start including ALFS XML 
snippets to act as suggestions for other package management systems.

(What would be involved in automatically making an RPM .spec file from an 
ALFS XML snippet?  Does one of them contain data another doesn't?)

Unsubscribe: send email to listar at
and put 'unsubscribe alfs-discuss' in the subject header of the message

More information about the alfs-discuss mailing list