You are now reverting to false accusations and insults.

Slackware can be built from scratch, using only the sources available in the Slackware source tree. That is how I rebuilt Slackware for the x86_64 architecture, and in the process I fixed up the SlackBuilds so that it became even easier to build for multiple architectures using one and the same source.

There is no master build script for Slackware. This distro is hand-crafted, and many packages are built several times, so that they can pick up functionality from packages that were not available during the first build.

Eric

Actually, I have a GPL question relating to this topic.

Now, the way I understand it, the GPL states that if your software is distibuted, then any changes you make as well as what is necessary to build those changes must be made available to those who request it..

If you only modify the software internally and don't release it, then there is no requirement to release or make available your changes.


To quote from the GPL 2.0


Would the slackware build scripts not come under "the scripts used to control compilation"?


edit: I posted this before I noticed Alien Bob's reply.

I am curious though, if there is no master build script or anything, why did Alien Bob refuse to give LuckyCyborg the information he asked for relating to the slackware build process?

Just curious

Which is not the case for Slackware.

What the hell are you talking about?

Read the last few posts of the thread dugan linked to, which is where this discussion began.

Look, here's the final answer: Yes, it's possible, and you can do it if you want, all the sources and slackbuilds are there, and that's pretty much all you need, so do it and shut up already.

If you read the 32-bit compatibilty notes http://connie.slackware.com/~alien/multilib/source/ they will explain how to build a cross compiling toolchain from scratch on a working Slackware system.

It is also possible to deconstruct and rework the installer. (mentioned innumerable time on this forum)

It is fairly easy to build a basic linux system from scratch, I have done this using LFS and the mini-linux referred to in the document here http://users.cecs.anu.edu.au/~okeefe.../buildMin.html

However the big difference it building and maintaining a coherent system.

Good luck

H_TeXMeX_H sums it up nicely...

But there is no point answering a disingenuous question intended only to create conflict... which in my opinion was the case all along.

The accusation that Slackware == M$ shows that clearly.

All arguments that follow, though they contain truth in themselves, simply feed a contrived conflict that does not otherwise exist.

Peace Slackers...

Citations and exact quotes needed.

Citations needed. Badly.

My question was asked in the thread title: I want to rebuild entire Slackware Linux Operating System to a slightly modified target (ie i686). The question is: It's possible? Or we have an case of False Open Source?

Well, I'd say he didn't provide anything because LuckyCyborg is a bigger dickhead than I am. (Which is no mean feat, since I picked a variant of dickhead for my LQ id.)

To answer the question, YES, the scripts and sources in /sources are the same ones used to build the packages.

Not the case with Slackware. And if you want to claim that this is a common practice, you need to prove it. Links please.

There is no such thing as "false open source" (a term you made up), the GPL has no "rebuild itself" clause (which you made up), and presenting source code as anything other than what it is is not a common practise (you made that up), It was not nice of you to fabricate things like this.

Examples?

How about CDRDAO package?

This package can't be compiled (today) without additional patches in the latest Slackware, today... This package is awful for you, because kill your CD/DWD access in the best case... :)

Citation needed. A bug report page or a developers' mailing list message will do.

Well, we talk about of entire operating system. In the awful case, it should be able to rebuild itself, if the published sources is right (and latest)...

That's is Open Source for an Operating System: you are able to rebuild everything itself. Or the thing is NOT an Open Source Operating System.