Re: "super" pkgs (was Re: Back to RedHat)
On Sun, Sep 27, 1998 at 04:24:22PM -0400, Adam P. Harris wrote:
> As for shipping a pkg-selecting depends-only ("super") package for
> Debian itself, I think interested parties should fork off on their own
> and go ahead and try it out for a bit. Only then will we be in a
> position to evaluate whether it's appropriate for inclusion in Debian
OK, I'll put my money where my mouth is. I hereby offer to act as a
focal point to get things started. Anyone who is interested in
helping out is invited to email me with their ideas or suggestions.
On Mon, Sep 28, 1998 at 12:07:44PM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> Quoting Federico Di Gregorio (email@example.com):
> > Because I don't like very much fast-and-ugly hacks. If the .deb is
> > required for some reason it is wellcome, if it is only there because
> > dpkg requires a valid .deb let's patch dpkg and remove it.
They say beauty is in the eye of the beholder ...
> But what harm does an empty .deb cause? Why is it ugly? And if you don't
> download a .deb with dependancy info to get your superpackage, what do
> you download? Are we going to have a new file format? Seems like a lot
> of work to do something we can _already_ do.
... right, why invent something completely new when the existing
packaging system is already up to the task.