[RFC] Moving the BLFS and LFS profiles to using XIncludes

Thomas Pegg thomasp at linuxfromscratch.org
Sun May 23 07:48:54 PDT 2004

On Sat, 2004-05-22 at 20:16, Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
> Thomas Pegg wrote:
> > But the initial work might actually outweigh the benefits or might not,
> > since each xml has to be a valid xml file and has to include the
> > general, package, etc entities as well in the doctype header of each
> > file. I guess one reason is that the LFS book uses xincludes, so why not
> > the profiles.
> This is the thing that concerns me, we are trading some additional 
> maintenance work for more complex parsing at run time. However, if we 
> also split package.ent into sections for each chapter, that will be less 
> of a concern.
How do using XIncludes make for more complex parsing, I've never noticed
anything when I used them in my profiles.
> I can think of an additional option: if we name the files in the chapter 
> directories properly, it would be pretty easy to produce a top-level 
> Makefile that could just "make" LFS.xml and system.ent from what it 
> finds in those directories, so maintenance would be pretty easy in that 
> respect. All that would be required would be to prefix the profiles in 
> each chapter directory with some type of numeric prefix to ensure they 
> can be sorted into the proper order.
There could be a potential problem with that approach, say if some
things get rearranged by way the order there in the book, then all the
files have to cvs removed, renamed and then added again to suit the new

LFS User : 4729 
Linux User : 298329 
warpcore - 09:45:37 up 2 days, 10:56, 1 user, load average: 0.19, 0.08,
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/pipermail/alfs-discuss/attachments/20040523/e18501f0/attachment.sig>

More information about the alfs-discuss mailing list