[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: RFC: moving busybox into its own .deb



Erik Andersen wrote:
> On Sun Jan 16, 2000 at 11:38:03PM -0700, Matt Porter wrote:
> > 
> > Actually, I was already using it in non-packaged format as the basis of
> > what I'm calling "Tiny Debian".  It's a deb-based distro for resource
> > constrained PDAs and embedded systems.  Having busybox separately packaged
> > will make it easier to manage the framework.  I actually generate a
> > complete Debian-based image from any host Debian box for my Psion palmtop
> > (ARM7).  The conflicts aren't a problem except when one decided to replace
> > busybox tar with GNU tar for enhanced functionality.  For short term
> > usage it's not going to bother 99% of people, though.
> 
> cool.  I'll finish up the packaging today then. 

Then reverting the order of conflicts could solve this problem.  If gzip, for
example, conflicts & replaces busybox, I guess it could then be installed on
top of busybox, but busybox could not be installed on a production system
already running gzip & co packages.
Well I'm not sure at all it is the right way because I don't have real
experience with dpkg internals.

Moreover it might be difficult to force all maintainers of conflicting packages
to add such statements on their package control files.

Any comments?

Regards.

-- 
 Eric Delaunay                 | S'il n'y a pas de solution, c'est qu'il n'y
 delaunay@lix.polytechnique.fr | a pas de problème.   Devise Shadok.


Reply to: