Which one?

[David A. Bandel]

On Sun, 9 Jun 2002 11:31:16 -0600
begin  Collins <erichey2 at attbi.com> spewed forth:

> On Sun, 9 Jun 2002 12:09:04 -0500 "David A. Bandel"
> <david at pananix.com> wrote:
> > On Sun, 9 Jun 2002 10:25:39 -0600
> > begin  Collins <erichey2 at attbi.com> spewed forth:
> > 
> > > On Sun, 9 Jun 2002 09:12:29 -0700 Tom Condon <tomc at eskimo.com>
> > > wrote:
> > 
> > [snip]
> > 
> > > > 
> > > > You left out the best learning tool (in my not so complete with
> > > > it yet opinion) -- Linux From Scratch!
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Right on - the more the merrier.
> > > 
> > > BTW, have you successfully built a normal desktop setup on an LFS
> > > base?  
> > 
> > Let's see, I have on my LFS system:
> 
> [ snipped ]
> 
> > 
> > in fact, I think the list of what I _don't_ have would be shorter. 
> > 
> > For me, a _base_ system (which uses libpam BTW), includes cron,
> > mail, etc., that LFS doesn't.  For me, LFS isn't even a base system.
> > 
> 
> LFS was a useful learning experience, and for novice users the LFS
> book is a useful repository of what's really in each of the basic
> packages, but I found that gentoo would get me where I wanted to be
> (and keep me there) a lot quicker.

Quicker than what?  My build is automated (scripted).  I doubt I could
install (build) Gentoo faster than LFS.  Besides, I have _no_ idea what
./configure --??? options are being used with Gentoo, and on that point
I?m rather fussy.

Ciao,

David A. Bandel
-- 
Focus on the dream, not the competition.
		-- Nemesis Racing Team motto