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

Re: Zero Install (was: Package cache)

On Wed, Aug 22, 2007 at 01:07:53PM +0100, David Given wrote:
> Hash: SHA1
> paddy@panici.net wrote:
> [...]
> > looks pretty cool, but someone should talk to them about this:
> > 
> > "The effect of this is that distribution-provided packages are often
> > more reliable than upstream ones (since upstream don't get to hear about
> > many of the bugs), and different distributions have fixed different
> > bugs, with no coordination between them. With Zero Install, bugs get
> > fixed upstream. So, the 'Debian developer' who currently fixes Gimp bugs
> > would still do the same job, but as a 'Gimp developer' instead. Thus,
> > the fixes would benefit everyone, not just Debian users."
> Yeah, that bit bothered me, too. They also have process problems: some of
> their packages don't work any more (skype) due to upstream moving the original
> tarball; some of them are buggy due to bashish (odfviewer)...
> But the technology's extremely nice, and works beautifully. It would be nice
> if there was some way of combining Debian's process and infrastructure with
> their package deployment technology... their primary requirement is that the
> upstream tarball must be able to be installed and run from any directory, and
> as user instead of root. Interestingly, rpms do this, and they can package and
> deploy rpms more or less trivially. Can this be done with debs?

a deb is little more than an ar archive, as much as rpm is a cpio archive :-)

if anything I though dpkg was further down the road of not executing
arbitrary progs at install time, dunno


Reply to: