Linux From Scratch 6.0 Released
Bubblehead writes "The Linux From Scratch community is pleased to announce the release of
LFS 6.0. This major revision of the book includes a number of major
package upgrades, including GCC 3.4.x, Linux kernel 2.6.8.1, and the
Udev software package, allowing for dynamic creation of device nodes.
The text has also been vastly re-written for improved readability."
I think this is the oldest, not the latest distribution...
It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
Be yourself no matter what they say
It basically becomes your perogative as to what gets updated and when.
If you're wondering what LFS's primary use is though...or what it seems to get used for a lot, is the creation of new distributions. People will build an LFS system, and from that you end up with Yoper or GoboLinux, to name but two.
I know a lot of people seem to have difficulty understanding the value of new distributions, but there are many reasons why they are valuable. The first is that for people who are sufficiently technically inclined and proactive, if none of the existing distributions fits their needs for a given purpose, (and yes, it still can and does happen) LFS gives them the ability to put together something exactly the way they want it...with everything they do want, and nothing they don't.
Another benefit of this system is that it encourages people to be self-sufficient, rather than relying on corporations to provide what they need...corporations who generally care far more about their own interests than those of the user anyway.
Yet another plus is that it stimulates and encourages technological progress. I've covered this topic before, but anyone who has read Darwin will know that in order for anything to advance according to the evolutionary model, there needs to be a lot of different instances of a given thing...the process needs to experiment with a lot of different mutations before it is decided which mutations are permanently integrated into new generations of the organism. The more different distributions and forms of Linux exist, the more this process in encouraged.
I think the reason why people dislike the idea of new distributions is because they look at things from a Microsoft-like perspective of usability, which unfortunately involves a couple of extremely negative assumptions.
1) That the end user is a drooling imbecile, who needs to have things made easy to the point of them being rote. Intellectual participation in computer use is seen as more anathema than anything else.
2) Because of the deep level of retardation that is assumed in the end user, it is therefore also assumed that the level of usability exists in inverse proportion to the level of diversity. That is, in order to keep things usable it is necessary to minimise the number of different possible solutions to a given problem, or software programs, as much as possible in order to avoid users becoming overwhelmed.
The problem is that if these two points are adhered to and followed, a number of other very bad things happen. One is that technological advancement grinds to a screeching halt, as we have seen in the current state of Microsoft's software. Because innovation is very difficult when these two points are adhered to, we then get security problems of the kind that we have also seen.
The other bad thing that this causes is that it promotes the idea that intellectual laziness is not only acceptable, but that it's actually a good thing...when the opposite is in fact true.
People need to realise that having new distributions isn't going to by definition hurt anyone, and that it is actually very good for Linux as a whole. If you only want to use one distro yourself without deviation, that's fine. But IMHO it is wrong to try and impose your own desire for uniformity, lack of diversity, and stagnation on the rest of the world.
Yet there is a group of people who do this.
I knew one couple who had actually had their own house build according to their design but the husband who was my collegue couldn't understand why I didn't like the read made windows desktop.
LFS is the most extreme way to get a linux system unless your firstname rhymes with a popular OS. What does it do? Well nothing except really show you what makes up a system. It won't teach you anything about programming but it will teach you a lot about just how complicated a modern computer system really is. The amount of code needed to create even the most basic system is insane. Start adding stuff like a grahpical desktop and you might start to have a better understanding of how all the software packages work together to make your desktop.
It is like stripping a car engine. Doing it doesn't make you a better driver but it can be a rewarding learning experience nonetheless.
Some of us are not satisfied to work with blackboxes. Just like those people who want THEIR house to be THEIR house LFS allows you total control over your system. Of course most users use a "regular" distro for their actual work but just maybe they have come to understand their systems a little better.
But to answer your question directly. If you got to ask why then it is not meant for you. It is like asking why people climb mountaints. Because they are there.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
I built a LFS about 6 months ago from the 5.x series. It was a great learning experience even though most of the time, I was just following instructions. I immediately gained much more respect for the packaged Linux distributions, not because LFS was bad, but because of the detail and complexity involved in putting to gather a working system.
My first suprise was the level of patching and configuration.I knew that some people described linux as a "hodgepodge" of different components and not a complete system. I always thought that was slightly trollish, but, in a way, I have came to appreciate what they mean. Most especially, I was suprised at how many of those components do not work togather unless they are patched or configured to force them to live togather. You can't just download the vanilla source of a package, compile it with defaults, and expect it to integrate into Linux. Lots of the packages had to be patched to make them work in Linux. Also, some of the packages have to have slightly esoteric configuration options set. If I hadn't been reading the instructions, I would have never known what patch to install or what configuration option to set. This gave me a lot of repect for the people who make distributions because they had to work that out for themselves and know all that stuff in detail.
My second suprise (and consequent appreciation for package distributions) has to do with the kernel patching. I was using an old Athalon 750. With a vanilla 2.4 kernel, it throws strange "spurious" interrupts on IRQ 7. But a Redhat 2.4 kernel fixes it. That tells me that the Redhat people took some extra effort to fix those annoying issues.
So in addition to being a great learning experience, LFS made me appreciate the effort that Redat, Debian, et. al. put into their work.