
Linux from Scratch 10.0 - caution
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/news.html
======
dang
The project itself was discussed a couple weeks ago here:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24238015](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24238015)

and a month before that here:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23787526](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23787526).

If curious see also:

2019
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20149111](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20149111)

2016
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11829373](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11829373)

2012
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4488162](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4488162)

2012
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3677350](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3677350)

2011
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3171448](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3171448)

2010
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1779665](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1779665)

~~~
rawoke083600
The fact that it, got "promoted/voted" to the front-page(again) is that not in
itself proof that is is valuable and still worthwhile to be submitted again ?

~~~
dang
No, it's definitely not in itself proof of that. If we went with that
standard, the front page would be mostly dupes. The few most
popular/sensational stories would get upvoted over and over again. And then
the threads would mostly be full of complaints about the dupes.

Posts about new releases by well-known projects are something of a grey area,
but if you want to read a long explanation of how we treat them, one is here:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23071428](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23071428).

~~~
rawoke083600
Thanks @dang. I also read your linked thread. I now better understand your
original comment and HN.

------
2bluesc
This is a great resource for those building embedded systems and want to
understand how everything is really put together.

Did this years ago and learned a ton, that said I'd probably never do it
again. Once you know, you know. And sometimes you wish you knew less.

~~~
kwanbix
I did it about 20 years ago. It was basically copy and paste. Very little
explanation of why are we doing this and what are the options. That is my
memory of it.

~~~
barrkel
I also did it 20 years ago, but I got a lot more out of it. As each piece went
in, I looked at it and what it did, and understood it as part of the whole
that was built at the end.

If you don't do it reflectively, and simply copy and paste command lines, then
I agree, you're not going to get anything out of it.

As it was, I had to debug a few build issues here and there, with version
drift; that too was educational.

The biggest thing to come out of it for me, apart from understanding the Linux
boot process better and a greater appreciation for chroot, was getting
comfortable with ./configure [options] && make && make install for installing
software from source.

~~~
mcdevilkiller
Exactly my experience, around 4 years ago

------
geertj
I never followed this but in ca 1995 I built a Linux boot / rescue floppy disk
from scratch. The amount of confidence this gave me with Linux was insane, and
I benefit from it to this day.

~~~
lmilcin
I have similar experience. I did couple LFS build around 2000 and the
understanding of how everything is put together profits to this day.

I would suggest anybody thinking seriously about Linux (if you want to call
yourself devops or SRE) to go through a full build at least once.

------
dgfitz
While it isn’t LFS I’ve been building custom OS distros with
bitbake/openembedded for a work project recently. I’d be curious if someone
here has done both LFS and used bitbake/OE to see what their thoughts are
comparing the two.

------
whytaka
I am eager to try this out. As a self-taught developer, I'm in a big turtles-
all-the-way-down phase and I feel learning the ins-and-outs of Linux will give
me intellectual satisfaction.

I would appreciate some thoughts on whether to go by the systemd route or the
non-systemd route. The pros and cons.

~~~
ghthor
Do non systemd, then do systemd

~~~
_huayra_
Is it possible to do the systemd book and then non-systemd?

I did the systemd one a few weeks ago and I think that besides a few small
affordances for some systemd quirk, the main issue was installing all the
prereqs for building systemd (namely meson, ninja, which openrc probably
doesn't require).

They give a nifty tar command to snapshot the disk, which could help create a
"fork point" for the setup. `pixz` is very helpful addition in this case (e.g.
`tar -cp $LFS | pixz -9 > my_backup.tar.xz`)

~~~
tinus_hn
If you install to a VM most also have snapshot features you can use.

------
kazinator
I put together and maintained a from-scratch embedded distro in the 2006-2010
time frame. I took a hint or two from Linux from Scratch.

I introduced the idea of using quilt for applying all the patches. I've
noticed more recently that OpenEmbedded and Yocto do the same thing.

------
johnklos
I've often wondered how one can do this. Good resource.

~~~
cogman10
I followed it as a teenager. LFS is excellent at teaching you all the ins and
outs of how linux works. As you build your own linux distro, you get a great
feel for what goes into standard distros.

------
mlang23
LFS and buildroot taught me a lot about how linux is build from scratch. A
very valuable learning experience. Thanks to both projects for their work.

------
giancarlostoro
They used to have a live CD for this but not anymore. What kinda setup does
anybody who does this go for? I been wanting to try LFS for a while.

~~~
cogman10
You just need a linux distro. I did it back in the day with mandrake linux.

Probably easiest to start with ubuntu.

LFS walks through isolation when you are building the system, so it doesn't
really matter what you start with.

~~~
chromedev
At this point I'd recommend starting with Manjaro. Nothing compares to the
AUR.

~~~
Vogtinator
You don't need the AUR for LFS.

~~~
n0rbwah
Well, the ultimate achievement when building an LFS system is to plug it to an
existing package manager so you don't have to keep updating stuff manually.

------
johnisgood
Found a typo: "gccc-10.2.0" is supposed to be "gcc-10.2.0".

~~~
jagged-chisel
ah, the GNU Crazy Compiler Collection

~~~
rantwasp
isn’t that GCC :)))

