Bug#32595: remove obsolete and confusing acquisition methods: harddisk, mounted, cdrom, nfs
On 31 Jan 1999 12:45:47 +0000, James Troup <james@nocrew.org> said:
> Adam Di Carlo <adam@onshore.com> writes:
>> Let me point out that I don't think you can find *anyone* who will
>> argue that the 'dpkg -iGROEB' system used by these dpkg/disk
>> methods (harddisk, cdrom, nfs, mounted) is better. In fact, using
>> 'dpkg -iGROEB' is much worse:
>>
>> * it doesn't do proper dependancy ordering * since it doesn't do
>> proper ordering, running it causes lots of scarey message; these
>> messages are bad in two ways: - they are a turn off to new users,
>> who conclude that debian is obscure, and broken - they mask real
>> bugs by all the noise generated * it requires several runs of the
>> configure step to get the packages properly installed, due to the
>> ordering problems
> Unless dpkg-multicd has maniacally changed since bootfloppies 2.0.3
> or so (when I last installed slink), it suffers from all these
> problems.
Hmm... You do seem to be correct. So sorry. However, it doesn't seem
to be any *worse* than the disk method, in fact, it's significantly
better in some ways (i.e., actually supporting the slink cd set).
I'd also argue dpkg-multicd renders dpkg's own disk methods additional
because there's no functionality in disk that multicd doesn't also do.
(In fact, multicd is derived from disk, from looking at the souce.)
Moreover, I believe it is more architecturally sound to split the
installation methods out of the source package for dpkg, due to
maintainability and modularity concerns I raised before.
>> The only arguments I've had from people who want to retain these
>> methods have already stated they're simply sticking to these
>> default methods due to inertia.
> Hardly. Jason's already admitted there *are* situations where apt
> loses to other methods, no matter how rare these situations might
> be.
You don't see me arguing that 'apt' replaces the 'disk' methods
for all cases (i.e., multi-cdrom support or serving up a slink cdrom
via nfs), so why are you arguing against that? All I said is that
"other methods meet or exceed the methods provided by 'disk' in dpkg,
and so the 'disk' based methods should be removed". Please argue
against that and not against a straw man argument, which was moreover
never even put forth.
--
.....Adam Di Carlo....adam@onShore.com.....<URL:http://www.onShore.com/>
Reply to: