Proposed changes to the policy (Was: My suggestions)
Victor,
Victor Nazarov <vir@comtv.ru> writes:
-snip-
>
> The first is the naming scheme of the debian packages. Debian uses
> names that consists of several parts separated with `-' charecter. I
> can suggest to use / as a sepparator and to store apt database as a
> directory tree.
> The following files must be stored in the /var/lib/apt/packages for
> instance:
> ...
> xfce4/core
> xfce4/wm
> ...
> so to install smth administrator must point an apt utility to the file
> under this directory. I think it's more comfortable to use such tree
> rather then use apt-cache search apt-get install combination
I see no advantage of proposed scheme over the current one. If you
want completions for package names you can use zsh or bash with
completions and dont mess with apt-cache search. If you want to do
grep, you can do it by grepping Packages file or grep-dctrl.
> The assosiated suggestion is to develope some general tool that will
> fill the lack of set operations in unix file system. This tool must
> build the directory tree depending on the keywords (sets, when each
> file is determined by the set intersection) like the debian menu
> system does... So for example administrator will be able to build
> alternative directory trees of packages and directly use them for
> installing. This tool also will be usefull for normall users to
> organize their files...
This suggestion looks like proposal of transition to another type of
filesystem like reiserfs4. Implementing such features in userspace
seem crazy.
>
> The next... Unix have a good file permisions managment system, but now
> only root can manage the acces to files. But I think normal users must
> have right to manage the access to files owned/created by them. The
-snip-
This is also filesystem feature, not debian one. Modern filesystems
have POSIX acl support in Linux[1] that should fulfil your requests.
-snip-
Peter.
--
Antispam protection: don't remove_these_lines_if you're not in my whitelist
(replying first time). If you do, you'll have to make additional operation
replying your own reply (and getting in my non-spammers whitelist). Sorry
for inconvenience.
Reply to: