[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: lfs-base-1.3.0.T



I'd like to begin moving toward the "new" loadset model, e.g. core, min, dev, cd-build, cd, etc. openssl would be in core. However, we don't have "core" yet, so it makes sense to *both* merge and keep openssl separate. Also, what happens when an openssl binary changes name? I think in the medium term, we'll build "core" by merging a bunch of package loadsets and some glue. In order to get to that point for "core", we'll need to build and keep separate:

    bash
    bind (we neeed to decide on bind8 or bind9)
    bzip2
    coreutils
    diffutils ( radmind dependency )
    e2fsprogs
    eject - (machine location tool)
    findutils
    gawk
    gettext ( lots of dependencies )
    glibc
    grep
    gzip
    less
    "fotm" bootloader (lilo, grub, etc.)
    modutils
    ncurses
    nettools
    netkit-base (for ping ONLY)
    nvi
    openssh
    openssl
    psmisc ( possible rc dependencies )
    radmind
    sed
    "fotm" init
    tar ( backing up data )
    util-linux ( fdisk, mount... )
    zlib

Which doesn't seem to be too daunting.

:wes

On 17 Jan 2005, at 16:52, Liam Hoekenga wrote:
In addition to merging this change, we should also keep openssl 0.9.7e separate.

Why? Base currently has 0.9.7d... so it looked to me like openssl get puts in the base.