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


On Tue, Apr 20, 1999 at 07:52:28AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> I think it's a bit much to say that it works extremely well--there are
> some major problems and some glaring missing features. (There's no
> all-round better alternative, but that doesn't have any bearing on
> dpkg's absolute quality.) But the question was basically, "should dpkg
> get ported all over the place." That's a different question thatn "can
> dpkg keep debian going." There are some very serious problems with dpkg,
> and it has been suggested that the only fix is to rewrite major portions
> of the code. So I ask, is it worth porting something that's got a
> rewrite hanging over it?
> Mike Stone

Well - I, as a general end user and debian developer, have never had a
problem using dpkg et al.  But if the bugs are as glamerous as you say
(I haven't looked into them in detail) then perhaps we should premote a
rewrite of dpkg with another primary aim being to "enhance portability".

So yes - why not look at porting it?  Just make one of the porting steps the
resolution of the outstanding bugs.



The box said "Windows 95, NT or better" .. so I installed Debian Linux
Reply with subject 'request key' for PGP public key.  KeyID 0xA9E087D5

Reply to: