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

Re: status of Progeny projects

On Tuesday, Nov 11, 2003, at 23:39 America/Denver, Peter Zoeller wrote:
Most software installs fail as a result of missing libraries. I would like to see a central repository for all libraries, old, new and development. A repository that when a library dependancy needs to be satisfied, the installer be it RPM, APT or anyone elses, can automatically access and download the appropriate version of library required. This repository should only hold nothing but libraries, no software, no packages, just libraries with a searchable capability that one could also manually search and download ones needs.

Just curious... have you ever actually used Debian? When you write to a list comprised of Debian developers that concentrates on Debian software and library packaging needs to suggest something we've been doing that for years now, I have to wonder why. If you want to install software from Debian, all of our package installation methods automatically install all the libraries (and, optionally, any other recommended or suggested software) required for full operation. That's what we do.

I'm not sure of the point of your suggestion-- having used more Red Hat systems in the past year than bears thinking about, I can see how you might think it useful for them, but even in that case, you have different libc versions, compiler revs, architectures and sometimes even kernels to keep track of, not to mention the version numbers of the libraries. The only sensible solution is to package libraries as part of a distribution, in which case I fail to see the utility of your idea.

With the version numbers used in linux there is no fear as there is in the other OS of overlaying and existing library that would result in the breaking of other software. It would be no problem to run the same library beside its earlier parent satisfying the need of all software.

Unless the new library was binary-incompatible with the old, requiring new revs of all the programs it uses. And then maybe the new library calls executables that don't exist, requiring you to install new software packages to handle that. At this point, it sounds like we're back to packaging libraries as part of a complete distribution, in which case I'm afraid your 'library-only' archive will not be of much use.

Along with this there should be a tool that will allow the cleaning up of ones libraries based on lack of activity so that the directories holding libraries such as /lib can be safely maintained and kept from growing out of hand.

Hrm.  Sounds a lot like dpkg, combined with deborphan.

Thanks to all open source developers for the work that has and continues to be done.

You're welcome. :)


Reply to: