On Thu, 9 Jun 2005, Jochen Kunz wrote:

>                           Our current LFS looks like a dead horse to me.
> Konrad Schroder still tries to make our current LFS working, but he may
> never get there. Someone (tls@ ?) said that our current LFS suffers from
> a poor implementation and the best way would be to rewrite it from
> scratch.
>
> Konrad and tls@ may correct me.

I wouldn't say "dead horse", but tls is right in saying that the 
implementation decisions made for BSD-LFS prevent its working the way it 
was intended to.  A new LFS could avoid those problems but would of course 
bring other, as-yet-unforseen problems with its new implementation.

I note, however, that we have most of the features from your wish list 
already in NetBSD LFS, with the proviso---

> if it gets usable at the end.

Take care,
 						Konrad Schroder
 						perseant@hhhh.org