|
|
@@ -2,57 +2,54 @@
|
|
|
<title>Who would want to read this book</title>
|
|
|
<?dbhtml filename="whoread.html" dir="preface"?>
|
|
|
|
|
|
-<para>There are a lot of reasons why somebody would want to read this
|
|
|
-book in order to install an LFS system. The question most people raise
|
|
|
-is "why go through all the hassle of manually installing a Linux system
|
|
|
-from scratch when you can just download an existing distribution?". That is
|
|
|
-a valid question which I hope to answer for you.</para>
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
-<para>The most important reason for LFS's existence is teaching people
|
|
|
-how a Linux system works internally. Building an LFS system teaches you
|
|
|
-about all that makes Linux tick, how things work together, and depend on
|
|
|
-each other. And most importantly, how to customize it to your own taste
|
|
|
-and needs.</para>
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
-<para>One of the key benefits of LFS is that you are in control of
|
|
|
-your system without having to rely on somebody else's Linux
|
|
|
-implementation. You are in the driver's seat now and are
|
|
|
-able to dictate every single thing such as the directory layout and boot
|
|
|
-script setup. You will also know exactly where, why and how programs
|
|
|
-are installed.</para>
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
-<para>Another benefit of LFS is that you can create a very compact Linux
|
|
|
-system. When you install a regular distribution, you end
|
|
|
-up installing a lot of programs you probably would never use.
|
|
|
-They're just sitting there taking up (precious) disk space. It's not
|
|
|
-hard to get an LFS system installed under 100 MB. Does that still sound
|
|
|
-like a lot? A few of us have been working on creating a very small
|
|
|
-embedded LFS system. We installed a system that was just enough to run
|
|
|
-the Apache web server; total disk space usage was approximately 8 MB.
|
|
|
-With further stripping, that can be brought down to 5 MB or less. Try
|
|
|
-that with a regular distribution.</para>
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
-<para>If we were to compare a Linux distribution with a hamburger you
|
|
|
-buy at a supermarket or fast-food restaurant, you would end up eating it
|
|
|
-without knowing precisely what it is you are eating, whereas LFS gives
|
|
|
-you the ingredients to make a hamburger. This allows you to carefully
|
|
|
-inspect it, remove unwanted ingredients, and at the same time allow you
|
|
|
-to add ingredients to enhance the flavour of your hamburger. When you are
|
|
|
-satisfied with the ingredients, you go on to the next part of putting it
|
|
|
-together. You now have the chance to make it just the way you like it:
|
|
|
-broil it, bake it, deep-fry it, barbeque it, or eat it raw.</para>
|
|
|
+<para>There are many reasons why somebody would want to read this book. The
|
|
|
+principle reason being to install a LFS system. A question many people raise
|
|
|
+is "Why go through all the hassle of manually building a Linux system
|
|
|
+from scratch when you can just download and install an existing one?". That
|
|
|
+is a good question.</para>
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+<para>One important reason for LFS's existence is helping people
|
|
|
+learn how a Linux system works from the inside out. Building a LFS system
|
|
|
+helps demonstrate what makes Linux tick, and how things work together and
|
|
|
+depend on each other. And perhaps most importantly, how to customize it to
|
|
|
+your own tastes and needs.</para>
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+<para>A key benefit of LFS is that you have more control of your system
|
|
|
+without relying on someone else's Linux implementation. With LFS, you are
|
|
|
+in the driver's seat and dictate every aspect of your system, such as the
|
|
|
+directory layout and boot script setup. You also dictate where, why and how
|
|
|
+programs are installed.</para>
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+<para>Another benefit of LFS is the ability to create a very compact Linux
|
|
|
+system. When installing a regular distribution, you end up with a lot of
|
|
|
+programs you likely will never use. They're just sitting there wasting
|
|
|
+(precious) disk space. It isn't difficult to build LFS systems of under
|
|
|
+100 MB. Does that still sound like a lot? A few of us have been working on
|
|
|
+creating a very small embedded LFS system. We successfully built a system
|
|
|
+that was just enough to run the Apache web server with approximately 8MB
|
|
|
+of disk space used. Further stripping could bring that down to 5 MB or
|
|
|
+less. Try that with a regular distribution.</para>
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+<para>We could compare distributed Linux to a hamburger you buy at a
|
|
|
+fast-food restaurant. You have no idea what you are easting. LFS on the
|
|
|
+other hand, doesn't give you a hamburger, but the recipe to make a hamburger.
|
|
|
+This allows you to inspect it, omit unwanted ingredients, and allows you to
|
|
|
+add your own ingredients that enhance the flavour of your burger. When you
|
|
|
+are satisfied with the recipe, you go on to preparing it. You make it just
|
|
|
+the way you like it: broil it, bake it, deep-fry it, barbeque it, or eat it
|
|
|
+raw.</para>
|
|
|
|
|
|
<para>Another analogy that we can use is that of comparing LFS with a
|
|
|
finished house. LFS will give you the skeleton of a house, but it's up
|
|
|
to you to install plumbing, electrical outlets, kitchen, bathtub,
|
|
|
wallpaper, etc.</para>
|
|
|
|
|
|
-<para>Another advantage of a custom built Linux system is added security.
|
|
|
-You will compile the entire system from source, thus allowing you to audit
|
|
|
-everything, if you wish to do so, and apply all the security patches you
|
|
|
-want or need to apply. You don't have to wait for somebody else to
|
|
|
-provide a new binary package that fixes a security hole. Besides, you
|
|
|
-have no guarantee that the new package actually fixes the problem
|
|
|
+<para>Another advantage of a custom built Linux system is security.
|
|
|
+By compiling the entire system from source code, you are empowered to audit
|
|
|
+everything and apply all the security patches you feel are needed. You don't
|
|
|
+have to wait for somebody else to compile binary packages that fix a security
|
|
|
+hole. Examine the new patch and build it yourself. You have no guarantee
|
|
|
+that the new package was built correctly and actually fixes the problem
|
|
|
(adequately). You never truly know whether a security hole is fixed or
|
|
|
not unless you do it yourself.</para>
|
|
|
|
Gerard Beekmans